UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

When "I" speak(s) to "you" : the literary subject as an effect of pronominal play in two works by contemporary… Hanafi, Rhoda E.A. 1987

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1987_A8 H36.pdf [ 4.53MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0097266.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0097266-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0097266-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0097266-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0097266-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0097266-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0097266-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0097266-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0097266.ris

Full Text

WHEN " I " SPEAK(S) TO "YOU": THE LITERARY SUBJECT AS AN EFFECT OF PRONOMINAL PLAY IN TWO WORKS BY CONTEMPORARY WOMEN WRITERS By RHODA E. A. HANAFI B.A., The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1983 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES PROGRAMME IN COMPARATIVE LITERATURE We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September 19 87 (c) Rhoda E. A. Hanafi, 1987 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of PRC&RPHhe Ik) / ^ r t P f t g - A T K j R U T c s R A T O ^ E : The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date Q^PT- I ; DE-6(3/81) Abstract The d e i c t i c property of pronouns, words that stand for proper names and only take on r e f e r e n t i a l status In the context of a s p e c i f i c utterance, i s a fascinating area of study inasmuch as pronouns are piv o t a l to the construction of a sense of subject. The process of constructing the l i t e r a r y s e l f is e s p e c i a l l y problematic as i t also involves the equivocal placement in time and space of the written subject. This thesis examines that process In r e l a t i o n to the way two contemporary women writers make use of f i r s t - and second-person pronouns In two texts, and In so doing proposes a theory of women's fir s t - p e r s o n f i c t i o n as a subversive strategy to write outside the dominant patriarchal ideology. Part I: When " I " speak(s) to "you", not only does the text mark empty spaces to be f i l l e d , o f f e r i n g up l i t e r a r y beances as signposts to ravishment, but reader, text, and writer also p a r t i c i p a t e in a t r i a d i c exchange of personal positions that turns the fixed origo of the d e i c t i c " I , here, and now" into another twist of the kaleidoscope, a temporary tableau of s u b j e c t i v i t y . When " I " speak(s) to "you", language converts into speech by making the personae the dramatic necessity of the l i n g u i s t i c act; but l i t e r a r y speech l o c a l i z e s i t s e l f within a context that i s endlessly locatable: with every reader and every reading, a d i f f e r e n t i n s t a n t i a t i o n . By writing l e t t e r s to t h e i r children, d i a r i e s to i i i themselves, or l i t e r a r y products that exclude themselves from main-stream genres, women find in the false dialogism of "you"-addressed monologues a way of sustaining the i l l u s i o n that one can write outside of patr i a r c h a l ideologies by denying the ar b i t r a r i n e s s of the sign. "S/he" is patently a f i c t i o n a l construct, and the t h i r d person the venerable mode of epic and n o v e l i s t i c narration. When I speak to you, we seemingly s h o r t - c i r c u i t that channel and make of our communication both a detour around the symbolic order and a transparently d i r e c t l i n e to the Other. Part II: In Oriana F a l l a c i ' s Lettera a un. bambino mal  nato this d i r e c t l i n e Is an umbilical cord, and her speech a series of lessons t o l d as fables. The unnamed "you" makes possible the transmission of personal experience in a form that seems harmless and c h i l d i s h . F a l l a c i makes her work innocuous by st r i p p i n g It of references to time, place, or person, so that the j o u r n a l i s t , a chronicler of public History, is able to don the mask of private writer communicating personal history. This act i s made possible by the equivocal functioning of the pronouns. Part I I I : Marguerite Duras, a self-avowed exile from writing at the time she wrote the three Aur£lia Steiner texts, and, above a l l , from writing as a coherent story with well-crafted characters that develop along the linear exigencies of beginning, middle and end, finds in the peripatetic nomination iv of "you" and " I " , an opening to a "post-Holocaust" solution to narrative. The s h i f t i n g lines of Aur£lia's t r i - p a r t i t e story are p a r a l l e l e d in the p r o l i f e r a t i o n of " s h i f t e r s " which fracture and disperse the unity of the text, preventing t o t a l mastery by the reader, while also f r u s t r a t i n g the reader's e f f o r t s to construct a monolithic sense of s e l f and Other. Table of Contents Abstract L i s t of Figures Acknowledgements Introduction Part I: The Subject As Pronoun Part II: Oriana F a l l a c i ' s Lettera a. un bambino  mal nato Part I I I : Marguerite Duras's Aurelia Steiner  Aurelia Steiner Aurelia Steiner By Way of Conclusion Works Consulted v i L i s t of Figures Page Figure 1: Incidence and Types of Naming in Aur£lia Steiner by Page Number 58 v i i Acknowledgements My thanks to Lorraine Weir, for these two years of encouragement; and for the freedom she granted me by her trust in my a b i l i t i e s ; to Ralph Sarkonak, for enticing me back to the textual nest; to Giusi De Stefanis, for her wisdom, friendship and i n t e l l e c t u a l i n t e g r i t y ; to Jared Finesmith, companion and sounding board, daytime muse and nighttime i n s p i r a t i o n , for helping me to r e a l i z e that writing is just one more a c t i v i t y in the t y p i c a l day of a cowboy-sleuth; and f i n a l l y , to my mother, for having brought me up with the conviction that I could do anything I set my mind to. 1 Introduction So, an homological analysis of person at the level of the signs of discourse.... It would be a magnificent subject for a "troisieme cycle" doctorat to ask someone to find out what becomes of the proper signs, the indications of person at the level of discourse. Roland Barthes, SC, 147. Theory In summing up the papers and ensuing discussions of the 1966 international symposium at Johns Hopkins University e n t i t l e d "The Languages of C r i t i c i s m and the Sciences of Man", Richard Macksey observed that "...the announced concern for methodological and a x i o l o g i c a l questions was perhaps diverted by a recurrent preoccuption with a b a s i c a l l y metaphysical question, namely, the status of the subject in the several d i s c i p l i n e s before u s . " / l / Members of that symposium who presented papers either p a r t i a l l y or t o t a l l y concerned with 'the subject', included such t h e o r e t i c a l l y and methodologically diverse thinkers as Georges Poulet, Lucien Goldmann, Tzvetan Todorov, Roland Barthes and Jacques Lacan, while a great deal of the discussion also concentrated on the precise conceptual formulation each speaker attributed to that term. The " s t r u c t u r a l i s t controversy", i t seems to us now, was far more motivated by the question of the subject than i t was by the nature and place of structure. Twenty years l a t e r books and a r t i c l e s continue to be published on the same topic. The punning t i t l e of Kaja Silverman's The Subject of Semiotics (1983) is an ind i c a t i o n of the inextricable r e l a t i o n that holds between any 2 theoretical inquiry into s i g n i f y i n g systems and the agent of s i g n i f i c a t i o n i t s e l f . Furthermore, as David C a r r o l l states in The Subject in Question (1982): ...the c o n f l i c t s between theory and f i c t i o n are fundamentally c o n f l i c t s among various concepts and figures of the subject - the subject that various theories assume, construct, formulate, and/or defend (the philosophical, h i s t o r i c a l , psychoanalytical, l i n g u i s t i c subjects) and the subjects assumed and/or figured by f i c t i o n . To resolve once and for a l l the question of the subject would also be to resolve d e f i n i t i v e l y the problem of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between theory and f i c t i o n . (6) Two premises of my discussion thus become apparent: 1. any answer to the "question of the subject" can only be provisional, serving to c r y s t a l l i z e presuppositions r e l a t i n g to wider t h e o r e t i c a l stances; 2. conceptions of the subject are pivota l to f i c t i o n ( s ) , theory(ies), and to the relationship(s) that hold between them. Given the abundant l i t e r a t u r e on t h i s topic and i t s i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y scope (philosophy, l i n g u i s t i c s , history, psychoanalysis) t h i s thesis w i l l concentrate s o l e l y on the construction of the f i c t i o n a l subject in two contemporary works of f i c t i o n , and w i l l examine that process s p e c i f i c a l l y in r e l a t i o n to the use of pronouns, the most "staggering" of s h i f t e r s , as Roland Barthes termed them./2/ Emile Benveniste's essays on pronouns, in Problemes de lin q u i s t i g u e  ge"nerale, provide the main the o r e t i c a l source, along with works by such other l i n g u i s t s as Karl Buhler, Roman Jakobson, and J u l i a Kristeva. 3 F i c t i o n Neither Oriana F a l l a c i nor Marguerite Duras has achieved status as a "serious l i t e r a r y writer". F a l l a c i i s known purely as a controversial and aggressive interviewer, while Duras, in spite of having received the Goncourt prize for L'Amant in 1984, continues to dwell in the nether regions of avant-garde cinematography. Marginal women writers, then, writing marginal texts. Lettera a un bambino mai nato i s a first-person narrative that t e l l s the ta l e of a woman's c o n f l i c t i n g desires to give b i r t h to the foetus that inhabits her body and to be free and s e l f - c o n s t i t u t i n g . When the pregnancy ends in miscarriage, the narrator puts herself on t r i a l in an hallucinatory e f f o r t to expiate her g u i l t . By completely eliminating any use of proper nouns from her text, F a l l a c i breaks with her work as a jou r n a l i s t and places the reader outside the discourses of history and p o l i t i c s that define the context and l i m i t s of her previous publications. The play of pronouns i s a piv o t a l element of that move. Aurelia Steiner Aurelia Steiner Aurelia Steiner i s a t r i -p a r t i t e monologue addressed to a 'vous' that f l o a t s among the narrator's mother, father, lover, and daughter. The three sections describe: 1. a questioning search for 'you', punctuated by the p l a i n t i v e c r i e s of a leprous cat outside a window by the sea; 2. a series of sexual encounters with s a i l o r s in a port town gradually engulfed by t i d a l storms; 3. 4 an anguished dialogue between a l i t t l e Jewish g i r l and her protector who are shut up in a black tower during an a i r - r a i d . Throughout the text, "Aurelia" d i s o r i e n t s and fractures the e f f o r t s of the reader to locate time and place as well as to piece together a coherent story. Adopting a strategy diametrically opposed to F a l l a c i ' s , Duras subverts the discourses of hi s t o r y and power by "over-naming", by p r o l i f e r a t i n g proper names u n t i l they lose t h e i r effectiveness as r e f e r e n t i a l markers. Between Theory and F i c t i o n One of the aims of t h i s thesis i s to demonstrate that these works/writers are ever on the borderline between naming and rendering anonymous a certain s u b j e c t i v i t y by constantly affirming and simultaneously denying their own and the reader's sense of subject through the ruses of the pronoun. In a p a r a l l e l move, thi s present work attempts to break down and disori e n t the reader's sense of subject by adopting a s i m i l a r strategy: " I " , "you", and "she" fuse and s p l i n t e r as the boundaries of text and interpretation - the language and meta-language of l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m - are perforated and then dissolved. In order to accomplish t h i s aim I f i r s t found i t necessary to question the nature of academic discourse, and to examine how one creates and affirms one's own s u b j e c t i v i t y i n the appropriation of a p a r t i c u l a r 'voice'. U n t i l recently, 5 most t h e o r e t i c a l a r t i c l e s and books seemed to suscribe to the f a l l a c y that a neutral tone, avoidance of the f i r s t - p e r s o n , and a preponderance of passive constructions and Subject-Verb-Object syntax lend the i n f a l l i b l e authority of s c i e n t i f i c i t y to their ideas. The absence of an obvious authorial subject in these papers i s meant to be a sign of o b j e c t i v i t y , and therefore of truth, to the reader. I attempt instead to write my own voice as one among many, a t r a n s c r i p t i o n of s e l f that takes i t s place in a polyphonic text composed of other thinkers and writers who appear in i t a l i c c i t a t i o n s and quoted passages in the text. This work is thus an endeavour to walk the borderline between language and metalanguage, in t h i s case, between l i t e r a t u r e and theory, in order to describe a marginal route around the academic subject. 6 Notes /!/ The S t r u c t u r a l i s t Controversy, p.320 /2/ i b i d . p.144 7 The Subject As Pronoun 1. S p a t i a l l y We cannot say anything about language or the functioning of language if we stay on the position of metalanguage. But language says something concerning itself in the permanent plays with its own categories, and that is what literary texts say. But it is not philosophical, it is not scientific. It is another practice of language, another status of the speaking subject. Kristeva, in Semiotica 217. " I " subject speak(s), tracing the imaginary conceptualized l i n e between language and meta-language, i n f i l t r a t i n g mySelf into the i n t e r s t i c e that separates within and without./I/ Not to talk about language but within language, narcotizing (blowing up, exaggerating) the permanent plays with i t s own categories. Speaking, saying: the very practice of the sujet en proce~s/2/ as i t delineates i t s own within and without. The boundary, then, of meta-/object, t h i s oblique slash, s h a l l provide the Itinerary for thi s discourse - ton parcours  de discours - which, at once, f i l l s up the i n t e r s t i c e and traces out i t s boundary. Not a confine, no legal border, but a permanent play, a ceaseless diversion, on a detour from meta- (='beyond, transcending') to ... ? But how do(es) " I " go beyond, transcending language? (And so she saw r e f l e c t e d in a double play of mirrors that old stand-by, mise en abyme, language reflected/ing in meta-language, an impoverished game of polished surfaces, false i n f i n i t y trapped within the f i n i t e faces of n a r c i s s i s t i c 8 imaging.) There i s no i n f i n i t y h e r e , no m e t a - s u p p o s i t i o n , no t r a n s c e n d e n t a l language t u r n i n g w i t h - i n i n / t o w i t h - o u t . What c o n t o u r do we (= you + me) g r a s p , which handholds do we g r i p , i n o r d e r t o t u r n "language" i n s i d e out? P r e s t i d i g i t a t i o n , then? A s o r t of I n t e l l e c t u a l mummery? Or another permanent p l a y t o show up o t h e r , unheard-of c r a c k s between meta- and ~> • • • • T h i s i n t e r s t i c e , t h e n , i s a h o l l o w f i c t i o n : d i c t i o n d i c t a t i n g d i s c o u r s e , and d i s c o u r s e d i c t a t i n g d i c t i o n : a " m e t a p h y c t i o n a l " f i c t i o n f i s s u r i n g the s o l i d w a l l of meta/language. I t i s i n t h i s c r e v i c e t h a t " I " i n s i n u a t e s i t s e l f , s p e a k i n g , b e i n g spoken, t a k i n g on i t s own s o l i d i t y as i t f i l l s up t h i s heterogenous h o l l o w . 2. T e m p o r a l l y II i i j i i s u b j e c t s p e a k ( s ) . . . " ( t ) h e r e , p r e s e n t l y , i n f u l l p r e s e n c e , t r a c i n g out i t s c o n t o u r (do you see i t ? ) by t h i s w r i t i n g . L o c a t e i t . Mark the s p o t . S i g n i f y i n g , s i g n a l l i n g i t s presence i n / b y the s i g n i f i e r , i t l o c a t e s mySelf i n the p r e s e n t - a l r e a d y - p a s t . (A new t e n s e : the t e n s e of ' e c r i t u r e ' : l e p r e s e n t - d e j a - p a s s e . ) B e n v e n i s t e w r i t e s t h a t "ce "present** ... n'a comme r e f e r e n c e t e m p o r e l l e qu'une donnee l i n g u i s t i q u e : l a c o i n c i d e n c e de 1 *ev6nement d e c r i t avec l ' i n s t a n c e de d i s c o u r s q u i l e d 6 c r i t " (PLG 262). Sheer c o i n c i d e n c e , the p r e s e n t g i v e s i t s e l f t o c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o n l y i n e n u n c i a t i o n : a 9 paltry sort of g i f t , t h i s "donn6e li n g u i s t i q u e " offers i t s e l f up only as a coinciding of event and description. So that in r e f e r r i n g , in mentioning, the speaker utters a temporal reference, a sort of temporary refuge in an unco-ordinated space. Dismantled as i t is erected, the present is reconstructed in/by the p e r i p a t e t i c peripheries of the s i g n i f i e r . 3. Presently On a r r i v e ainsi a cette constatation - surprenante a* premiere vue, mais profondement accordee a" la nature r§elle du langage - que l e seul temps inherent a l a langue est le present axial du discours, et que ce present est i m p l i c i t e . II determine deux autres r£f§rences temporelles; celles-ci sont necessaizement explicit&es dans un s l g n i f i a n t et en retour font apparaltre le present comme un ligne de separation entre ce qui n'est plus present et ce qui va ^ t r e . Benveniste, ProblSmes du langage 9. The present is i m p l i c i t in speech as i t is inherent to language. By s t a t i n g " I " , I locate(s) a "generating a x i a l centre", a temporal / s p a t i a l axis. A l i n e , then, of affirmation and separation: affirming 'now' and 'here 1, yet separating present from past / future, " I " rends as i t renders, parting, s p l i t t i n g what no longer i s from what may be, yet simultaneously defining the very p o s s i b i l i t y for that s p l i t . This l i n e of separation i s affirmed, however, only in discourse: "C'est dans 1'instance de discours ou je. designe le locuteur que c e l u i - c i s'6nonce comme 'sujet'" (PLG 262). Speaker and subject synonymize in discourse; the " I " speaks 10 i t s e l f In/onto a graphic location through pronominal appropriation. S u b j e c t i v i t y in these terms i s nothing other than the locus of locution, a p l o t t i n g of the person on a time / space continuum in the precise Instance of speech. Two intersecting perpendicular strokes on the page can serve as a coordinate system for us with O as the origo, the point of o r i g i n for the coordinates: I maintain that three deictic/3/ words must be put at the place of 0, if this scheme is to represent the deictic field of human language, namely the deictic words here, now, and 1_. These l e x i c a l items, so simple in their sound structure, might induce the language theorist into esoteric philosophical abysses or to respectful silence, when challenged to determine their function.. Rather, he should simply acknowledge that it is certainly very peculiar, but nevertheless precisely statable, how they function in a concrete utterance. Biihler 12. The 0 , origo of indexical reference is a dangerous abyss which " I " s k i r t s either by remaining r e s p e c t f u l l y s i l e n t or by concretizing i t s e l f in utterance. " I " does not symbolize or name, I / i t denote(s) nothing but its/my presence, pointing d i r e c t l y to an o r i g i n a l point of reference: the origo of su b j e c t i v i t y . D e i c t i c gestures that indicate nothing but the point of o r i g i n of speech, 'I*, 'here' and 'now' "demand that they be characterized as signals" (Biihler 12 ) , thus distinguishing themselves from the naming words, which "function as symbols, and receive their s p e c i f i c complete and precise meaning within the synsemantic f i e l d " (Biihler 12 ) . 11 Excluded from meaning as a conventional (syntactic / semantic) f i e l d of sign-functions, d e i c t i c markers take up residence only on the outskirts of the symbolic f i e l d , in a s i t u a t i o n a l , contextual cross-current of temporary forces./4/ As Benveniste writes: "[Les pronoms] se distlnguent de toutes les designations que l a langue a r t i c u l e , en c e c i : i l s ne renvoient ni a un concept ni a un individu" (PLG 261). "Singulier"/5/, "peculiar"/6/, "staggering"/7/, "scandalous"/7/, " I " i s the nomadic nomenclature for a nonproductive, non-existent nomination. 5. I_ and You (If they axe to be human, they must be at least two in number.) Kojeve 43. Le langage n'est possible que parce que chaque locuteur se pose comme sujet, en renvoyant a lui-meme comme je_ dans son discours. De ce f a i t , je_ pose une autre personne, celle qui, tout extfirieure qu'elle est & "moi", devient mon echo auguel je dis tu et qui me d i t tu....Cette p o l a r i t S ne signifie pas SgalitG ni sym&trie: "ego" a toujours une position de transcendance a 1'egard de tu; nGanmoins, aucun des deux termes ne se concoit sans l'autre; ils sont compl£mentaires, mais selon une opposition "interieur/ext^rieur", et en mime temps i l s sont r€versibles. Benveniste, PLG 260. As " I " explore(s) the confines of s u b j e c t i v i t y , running back and forth along the border of meta/language, necessarily implicating my/itSelf In a non-symbolic, d e i c t i c f i e l d , and at once, circumscribing the origo of r e f e r e n t i a l speech, " I " also, by my/its very a l l o c u t i o n , a l l o c a t e ( s ) an-other in 12 my/its subjective economy. Within and without, "vers l ' i n t e r i e u r " and "vers 1'exterieur", are the reversible sides of an i s o l a t i n g membrane which inwardly and outwardly designs the structures and regions of the communication act. This common border is a resonating surface, enclosing an echoing chamber of the person: " I " speak(s), say(s) my/itSelf and simultaneously hear(s) echoed back the voice of "you", a voice that paradoxically originates with, and within, the i s o l a t i n g confines of "me". The person, l i k e the present, both affirms and separates: affirms i t s e l f in the appropriation of the personal pronoun, and separates i t s e l f from the exterior in the instant substantiation of the other, "you". If neither equal nor symmetrical, however, how is t h i s 'polarity of persons' to be characterized? La subj'ecti vi te se lalsse localiser un instant dans une stase pronominale qui, sans £tre isolSe en s o i , maintient des r e l a t i o n s definies avec les autres. Du point de vue de cette instantaneite de la subjectivit6 dans l'usage normatif du langage,, 1 '§qo toujours transcendental et surplombant 1'allocution, ne s'isole qu'en s'opposant a tu. Kristeva, "Instances du discours" 77. Sub j e c t i v i t y is not any thing: i t is a motionlessness, an instantaneous s t a s i s in a pronominal equilibrium brought on by a r e l a t i o n a l positing of " I " and others. 'Ego' remains "transcendental and overhanging a l l o c u t i o n " , s i l e n t l y poised on the outward rim of speech, over and above the l o c a l i s i n g e f f e c t of discursive orientation. But in utterance, d i v i s i o n and complementarity: an instantaneous s p l i t t i n g of the 13 "forever transcendental" I which cleaves i t s e l f into the oppositional sides of the same, reversible (non-)duality: " I " becomes "you", and "you", " I " , so that "you" is both other and the same; not a difference, but rather a question of p o s i t i o n a l i t y on the self-same axis. La conscience de soi n'est possible que si elle s'eprouve par contraste. Je n'emploie i e qu'en m'adressant a quelqu'un, qui sera dans mon allocution un tu. C'est cette condition de dialogue gui est co n s t i t u t i v e de l a personne, car e l l e implique en reciprocity que je deviens tu dans l'allocution de c e l u i qui a son tour se dSsigne par je. Benveniste, PLG 260. Ains i ne s'etonnera-t-on pas de constater que "tu" est une facon de nommer "je", que "tu" cache " j e " . Kristeva, "Instances du discours" 86. Allocution thus implies dialogue and r e c i p r o c i t y : a speech drama in which the personae exchange the masks of their person/8/ in a r e c i p r o c a l play of pronominal cache-cache (hide-and-seek). A strange game, paradoxically contrived, in which the players reveal themselves through speech, c a l l attention to t h e i r own presence, and a f f i r m to themselves the i r Selves, while at the same time implicating the other through a r e c i p r o c a l g i f t of persona, thus masking, covering up, and assuming the pretence of pronominal a l l o c a t i o n in an endless series of moves, stases and hypostases. Su b j e c t i v i t y i s not any thing: i t i s the i t i n e r a n t e f f e c t of an incessant positing and posing of the person, a double play that c a l l s into action " I " and "You" in a perpetual game of revealment and masking. 14 6. S/he Dans les deux premieres personnes , i l y a a la f o i s une personne i m p l i g u £ e et un d i s c o u r s sur c e t t e pezsonne. "Je" des igne c e l u i gui p a r l e et i m p l i g u e en meme temps un enonce sur le compte de "je": disant "je", je ne p u i s pas pazlez de moi. A la 2e pezsonne, "tu" es t necessa irement des igne par "je"; et, en mkme temps, "je" enonce guelgue chose comme pzedicat de "tu". Mais de la 3e pezsonne, un pzedicat est bien enonce, seulement hors de "j 'e- tu"; c e t t e forme es t ainsi exceptee de la r e l a t i o n par laquelle "je" et "tu" se specifient. Des lozs la legitimite de cette fozme comme "pezsonne" se t rouve mise en q u e s t i o n . B e n v e n i s t e , PLG 228. f J J1 es t mechant: c'est le mot le plus mechant de la langue: pronom de la non-pezsonne, il annule et moztifie son zefezant; on ne peut 1'appliquez sans malaise a" gui l'on aime; disant de gue lgu 'un " i l " , j'ai toujouzs en vue une sozte de meurtre par l e l a n g a g e . . . . Barthes 171. "I" and "you" engaged i n c o n v e r s a t i o n : as we exchange the masks of person i n a mutual r e a f f i r m a t i o n of the s t a t u s of s u b j e c t , we i m p l i c a t e each other i n our d e i c t i c f i e l d s , r e v e a l i n g the presence of our personhood through our e n u n c i a t i o n . "I" s a y ( s ) "s /he", and t h i s u t t e r a n c e immediate ly p o i n t s to a r e f e r e n c e o u t s i d e our shared c o o r d i n a t e system, a p o i n t e x t e r i o r to the echo ing chamber c o n s t i t u t e d by our d i s c o u r s e . "S/he" i s an absent e n t i t y , d e s i g n a t i n g no one i n p a r t i c u l a r or an u n s p e c i f i e d m u l t i p l i c i t y of p e r s o n s . / 9 / The t h i r d person i s a mis-nomer, s i n c e the person i t c a l l s up i s n o t , i s a n o n - p e r s o n , f o r e v e r exc luded from the i n t i m a t e r e f e r e n c e of p e r s o n a l d i a l o g u e . T h i s murderous a p p e l l a t i o n d i s t a n c e s the t h i r d o ther 15 from any access to the origo of s u b j e c t i v i t y , and as such only names the p o s s i b i l i t y of person. It is thus a hypothetical nomenclature, the f i c t i o n a l person par excellence./10/ If "s/he" i s annulled and mortified, hypothetisized and f i c t i o n a l i z e d , "s/he" also opens up for " I " a route to a meta-l i n g u i s t i c promontory: Si 1'6nonciation se f i x a i t en un "il" a i n s i isole" de 1'allocution, e l l e pourrait s ' a r t i c u l e r comme un metalangage ou comme une contemplation: tenu par un sujet forclos, soumis a* la l o i ou usurpant sa place. Kristeva, "Instances du discours" 90. "S/he" is the mark of an utterance issued by a foreclosed subject, one who is debarred from the l i n g u i s t i c Eden of innocent speech. For " I " to name an absent (non-)person or to refer to a point outside of the d e i c t i c f i e l d of the discursive instant, " I " must f i r s t of a l l conceive of that exterior, that other place, in order to "plan the murder" from a transcendental position of self-conscious l i n g u i s t i c knowledge. The t h i r d person i s indeed a meta-fictional construct since Its use sets up a distancing e f f e c t , f i r s t by removing the subjective " I " from the t h i r d other while placing i t in a f i e l d outside of the d i a l o g i c a l reference coordinates of "we", relegating "s/he" to the status of non-person and thus setting up an unbroachable dichotomy between "us" inside, located, allocated in the discursive instant, and "them", outside, unlocatable, multiple, hypothetical creations of language. Secondly, "s/he" distances the speaking " I " from speech 16 i t s e l f , by c a l l i n g attention to the unnatural a r t i f i c e of pronominal naming: where denotation i s c a l l e d into question, where "only one" and "many" are designated by the same term, the i m p l i c i t transparency of the here-and-now clouds over, language c a l l s attention to i t s e l f and no longer to the message./II/ 7. L i t e r a l l y Now l e t " I " l i t e r i z e i t S e l f . L i t t e r i n g the marks of its/my presence in the pages of an already-past present, what here-and-now do(es) " I " render? These l i t e r a l t ranscriptions of a displaced presence plot themselves endlessly onto any time and space coordinate system. "L*instance du discours" i s multiple, i n f i n i t e l y repeatable; re-enacted, re-activated in the instance of reading, t h i s instant transmutation (ecriture to lecture) sunders the present from i t s o r i g i n a l location. Uprooted, evicted from i t s temporary/temporal refuge, the l i t e r a r y " I " takes on a migratory cast. The i m p l i c i t l y present, seemingly inherent to unspoken language, i s , thus, once spoken, once s i g n i f i e d , immediately implicated in another time: the past of i t s own presence, marked in the trace of the s i g n i f i e r , and the future of i t s own re-enactment, given by the p o s s i b i l i t y of another reading. The l i t e r a r y " I " i s a necessary explication of the migratory subject-in-process, forever en t r a i n de. . ., straddling past, present and future, locating i t S e l f in the double instance of 17 ecr iture-lecture./12/ In language and in the use of language, d u p l i c i t y plays a cardinal role. Jakobson, " S h i f t e r s " 133./13/ The written is doubly d u p l i c i t o u s : r e f e r r i n g 'back' to a no-longer now and 'forward' to a possibly i s , while re-enacting the here-and-now in a reader's present, the deli b e r a t e l y deceptive status of the l i t e r a r y text also confounds attempts to pin down the place of the person. " I " and "you" no longer designate speaker and l i s t e n e r , but some kaleidoscopic hypostasis, an instantaneous s t a s i s of a pyramidal po s i t i n g between author, text, and reader. "S/he", then, is a f i c t i t i o u s f i c t i o n , a f i c t i o n within a f i c t i o n of an imaginary absent presence, r e a l i z e d s o l e l y within the confines of a l i t e r a r y possible world, and unlocatable except within that very imaginary universe of discourse. 8. L'homme qui parle [Le discours est] la langue en tant qu'assum6e par l'homme qui parle, et dans la condition d'intersubjectiviti qui seule rend possible la communication linguistique. Benveniste, PLG 266 "L'homme qui parle": two i n v i s i b l e appropriations combine to make imperceptible and inaccessible la. femme qui ecr i t . Discourse, a running back and forth (dis-cursus) between f u l l y constituted s u b j e c t i v i t i e s , leaves undetected, unnoticeable, both women and writing, as i f by rendering inconspicuous t h i s 18 subsumation - a taking up under of the hidden a l t e r i t i e s -they w i l l remain undetected, and more, incapable of being seen. This visionary lapsus is not just a metaphysical slippage, or an innocuous s l i d i n g of the s i g n i f i e r under the s i g n i f i e d : when he speaks, man takes on language, assumes It as his own, enters the subjectivized arena of l i n g u i s t i c communication through t h i s very assumption. When does language become discourse, and speech, writing? What is pernicious about th i s imperceptible lapse, and at what point precisely does i t f a l l through? Language i s converted into discourse, says Todorov ( S t r u c t u r a l i s t Controversy 316) through (not s o l e l y ) the agency of the "shifters"/14/, those empty d e i c t i c markers that stand outside denotative meaning, gesturing, pointing, showing, but remaining ( l i k e women) naturally, Naturely, mute and ins i g n i f i c a n t . / 1 5 / It i s by f i l l i n g up the emptiness of d e i c t i c signals that man s i g n i f i e s his s e l f in the present, takes on presence, and presents himSelf in the act of communication. Denoting, r e f e r r i n g , appropriating proper names, marking his proper-ty through s e l f - i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , man circumscribes the 0, origo of the here-and-now./16/ Through the agency of d e i c t i c anchoring in contextuallzed, concretized speech utterances, man traces out and f i l l s i n the 0-mphal(l)us of his own s u b j e c t i v i t y . Et l a  femme qui e c r i t ? But what about (the) woman who writes? 9. La femme qui e'er i t Aussit6t que produit, l'6nonc6 d i s p a r a i t , s i fond 19 dans 1'Snonciation d'une nouvelle parole. Eph6mere, sans laisser plus d'empreinte gue l e vol premier de l'oiseau ou que de fugaces etreintes. Lamy 26. f I J t i s In the aspiration toward artistic and, in p a r t i c u l a r , l i t e r a r y creation that woman's desire- for affirmation now manifests i t s e l f . Why literature? Kristeva, "Women's Time" 31. A woman is in the act of writing. Putting pen to paper, she enters into a socio-symbolic contract, contractuallzes herSelf Into a s i g n i f y i n g practice, and encodes the expression of herSelf into a series of sign-functions already negotiated by a community of language-users. The bargain has already been struck: the woman who writes i s a woman being written. Whether excluded from the dominant discourse or simply marginalized, the writing woman i s also confronted by a sense of i n v i s i b i l i t y : her gender is subsumed under the i m p e r i a l i s t i c , supposedly ambisexual, appellation of man. Her writing i s thus an act of affirmation, an attempt to make v i s i b l e the fugacious f l i g h t of speech, to coalesce the ephemeral chatter of the second sex into a s o c i a l l y valued form. But not a l l writing i s Lit e r a t u r e . The l i t e r a r y i s a prescriptive p r i n c i p l e , and canonization a process of power at work, i n v i t i n g some texts into, and reje c t i n g others from i t s hallowed h a l l of fame. The woman who writes maps out a strategy of acceptance or rej e c t i o n according to the choices she makes: l e x i c a l , s y n t a c t i c a l , narrative and discursive (genre) choices. 20 Her marks on the page graphically proclaim a g r a f f i t i -l i k e affirmation of presence ("I was here", scrawled on the back walls of the l i t e r a r y ante-chamber); but, at the same time, th i s very writing disassociates i t s e l f from i t s o r i g i n . It is bastardized speech, set loose to c i r c u l a t e unparented in a s i g n i f y i n g economy. The graphic assertion of " I " i s a locating function, an affirmation of here-and-now, but paradoxically, by not naming, by not assigning a proper name to th i s origo, the woman/17/ who chooses to use personal pronouns dis-locates herSelf, puts herSelf out of j o i n t from the coordinating axes, displaces and s h i f t s herSelf to an anonymous empty pos i t i o n , capable of being f i l l e d in and assumed by a multitude of readers. The " I " (and "you"), assumed endlessly by the e f f o r t s of the reader, are thus more appropriable than the t h i r d person, which distances the reader by i t s meta-lingual and meta-fictional e f f e c t . She, at once, asserts, locates, d i s l o c a t e s , displaces, renders anonymous, and p l u r a l i z e s herSelf by th i s act. A s t r a t e g i c move, then, in the l i t e r a r y game, to bring the reader •closer' by allowing her/him to assume the origo of the already-past written present, but one which simultaneously proclaims i t s distance from the ' c l a s s i c ' n o v e l i s t i c genre, the murderous t h i r d -person narrative. The pronominal d i s l o c a t i o n is doubled: s h i f t i n g the space-time coordinates of the origo according to a reader's appropriation, i t simultaneously displaces both writer and reader out of the l i t e r a r y confines of a f i c t i o n a l 21 constraint. This side-stepping gesture i s also a nimble avoidance of the authoritarian function of the Author, a patr i a r c h a l posture assumed by the writer who "fathers" the text, patents the l i t e r a r y product, propertizes his patrimony before putting i t out to c i r c u l a t e as exchange-value in the economy of l i t e r a r y business. This public persona is nothing but another s o c i a l construct, one that a woman s k i r t s by continuing to write those t r a d i t i o n a l l y * female' forms such as the diary, the l e t t e r , and the fir s t - p e r s o n monologue addressed to a "you"-listener. A sense of a l i e n a t i o n from the authoritarian / aut h o r i a l function, then? An uncomfortable compromise in order to speak across the outer, marginalized frequencies of the p a t r i a r c h a l channels of Literature? More than l i k e l y , excluded from the anthologies of Great Books, and unwilling now to be recuperated into that t r a d i t i o n , the woman writing today finds in the fi r s t - p e r s o n monologue an anonymous discourse, bordering on the confines between transcribed voice, autobiography (= herstory), and f i c t i o n , a f i c t i o n conceived outside the genres that have excluded her u n t i l now. 10. Gender and Genre Emerse dal mondo del silenzio e del bisbigllo al mondo dell'espzessione, f i n dal loro primo apparire l e donne che sczlvono vengono spesso calamitate a i margini d e l l a scena lettezazia. Le troviamo impegnate i n forme di l e t t e r a t u r a , se non pzecazie o pzive di t r a d i z i o n i , certo piu' f l u i d e e facilmente pzaticabili. Sono generi dominati, almeno 22 all'apparenza, da una logica del frammento plu' che dal progetto compluto; l e raccolte d i l e t t e r e , g l i e p i s t o l a r i , e i d i a r i . A l t r e s c r i t t r i c i s i zivolgono all'autobiogzafia, un genere che porta sempre a una d i f f i c i l e v e r i f i c a d e l l a propria i d e n t i t a ' (dal greco graph!a "descrizione", auto's "propria", bios "vita"). Rasy 93. IMli sembra che il comportamento mimologico p o s t u l i dall'inzio il r i f i u t o d e l l ' a r b i t r a r i e t a ' del segno. I n f a t t i , tale comportamento s i muove nella logica dell'imaginario; 1'illusione mimologica consiste nel credere che il segno sia un doppio d e l l a cosa, che vi sia tra essi un rapporto d i necessita', che il linguaggio aderisca pertettamente alia r e a l t a ' in xnodo da conf ondervisi. B f l ' i l l u s i o n e che sta alia base sia della s c r i t t u r a epistolare che di quella diaristica. Kreyder 504. A clandestine denial of f i c t i o n a l i t y , a search for refuge in marginalized f i r s t - p e r s o n forms, a development of "the l o g i c of the fragment", a refusal of the a r b i t r a r i n e s s of the sign...thus I/woman write(s) my/herSelf into the symbolic order while remaining, a l l the same, within the confines of the imaginary. Pursued ceaselessly around the borders of s i g n i f i c a t i o n , barred from entry into the dominant male discourse, I/she put(s) in stakes where language seems i t s most transparent, where f i c t i o n and r e a l i t y superimpose: in the deployment of an I-voice, t e l l i n g the t a l e , describing my/her own l i f e , as i f the narration i t s e l f were nothing more than a description of an already-formed i d e n t i t y , rather than the very construction of that i d e n t i t y i t s e l f . L ' i l l u s i o n e secondo la quale, tra la realta* e 1 1 e s p r e s s i o n e che ne diamo nelle confidenze, nelle l e t t e r e e nei d i a r i , e s i s t e solo un legame d i naturalezza, nasconde il fatto che ordiniamo i d a t i del vissuto secondo le leggi di una s t o r i a gia'  s c r i t t a . 23 Kreyder 511. History / the story has already been written, but the passage from passive, spoken object to active, speaking subject can only take place in the act of narration. When I/woman t e l l ( s ) my/her story, appropriating a pronominal position, revealing the coordinates of here-and-now (but displacing and s h i f t i n g that origo according to the unlocatable o r i g i n of lecture) while implicating the other in my/her enunciation (donning and exchanging the mask of the persona), I/she also defy(ies) the f i c t i o n a l i t y of language, step(s) outside the generic constraints of Lit e r a t u r e , refute(s) the power of Authorship, and enter(s) into the socio-symoblic order while at once remaining on i t s threshold. More precisely, I/she mark(s) the contours of my/her own Identity, take(s) on and trace(s) out the lineaments and substance of subjecthood. 24 Notes / l / "Contrairement a ce [qu'on c r o i t ] , with-out n'enferme pas les expressions contradictoires "avec sans"; le sens propre de wit h est i g i "contre" (cf. withstand) et marque pulsion ou e f f o r t dans une d i r e c t i o n quelconque. De la" w i t h - i n "vers 1'intSrieur" et with-out, "vers l'exterieur", d'ou "en dehors, sans" (PLG 81). /2/ See Catherine Belsey's C r i t i c a l Practice, 64-7, for a succinct account of t h i s Lacanian / Kristevan term. See also under "process" in Leon S. Roudiez introductory glossary to Desire in Language: A Semi o t i c Approach to Literature and Art. New York: Columbia UP, 1980. /3/ 'Deictic' means simply 'pointing or showing d i r e c t l y * . John Lyons has defined d e i x i s as "...the location and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of persons, objects, events, processes and a c t i v i t i e s being talked about, or referred to, in r e l a t i o n to the spatio-temporal context created and sustained by the act of utterance". (From Lyons, John. Introduction to  Theoretical L i n g u i s t i c s • London: Cambridge UP, 1977; qtd. by Mark Steedman in Speech, Place, and Action 125.) Lyons himself also notes (Speech, Place, and Action, 106) that "Peirce's term "index" i s but one of a set of grammatical and philosophical terms, t r a d i t i o n a l and modern, a l l of which are based, i n one way or another, upon the notion of pointing: 'deixis', 'demonstrative•, 'ostension', etc.". We can add ' s h i f t e r s ' to that l i s t of terms. See also Charles Fillmore, Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis, 39: "Deixis i s the name given to those formal properties of utterances which are determined by, and which are interpreted by knowing, c e r t a i n aspects of the communication act in which the utterances in question can play a r o l e . " Linguists i d e n t i f y three basic types of d e i x i s : person (personal pronouns, proper names), place (eg.'above', 'there') and time (eg.'yesterday', 'next Tuesday 1). /4/ Cf. Biihler, p. 19: " B r i e f l y speaking, the words I_ and you refer to the role holders in the on-going speech drama, in the speech action. In prosopon, the Greeks had an excellent name for i t , and the Romans meant nothing by persona but the r o l e in the speech act.... The main and o r i g i n a l function of personal pronouns l i k e J_ and you i s not to denote sender and receiver, just as names denote, but only to refer to these role holders...". /5/ Benveniste, above. /6/ Biihler, above. /!/ Roland Barthes, i n The S t r u c t u r a l i s t Controversy, 144: 25 Inasmuch as person, tense and voice imply these remarkable l i n g u i s t i c beings - the " s h i f t e r s " - they oblige us to conceive language and discourse no longer in terms of an instrumental and r e i f i e d nomenclature, but in the very exercise of parole. The pronoun, for example, which is without doubt the most staggering of the " s h i f t e r s " , belongs s t r u c t u r a l l y to [parole 1. That i s i t s scandal, i f you l i k e . . . . /8/ Note the double meaning of 'persona': in L a t i n i t means 'mask'. /9/ "Seule l a "troisieme personne", etant non-personne, admet un v e r i t a b l e p l u r i e l . " Benveniste, PLG 236. /10/ ""Je", extirp6 de sa position, s'accroche done a un " i l " qui, pour etre hors dialogue, ne disigne aucun 6nonciateur de l ' a c t d l s c u r s i f en cours, mais marque slmplement et objectivement l a p o s s i b i l i t y d'une instance de discours." Kristeva, "Instances du discours" 82. / I I / Roman Jakobson: " [ S l h i f t e r s are distinguished from a l l other constituents of the l i n g u i s t i c code s o l e l y by t h e i r compulsory reference to the given message" ("Shifters, Verbal Categories, and the Russian Verb" 132). Jakobson places s h i f t e r s in the Peircean category of INDEXICAL SYMBOLS: signs that are associated with the represented object by a conventional rule, yet necessarily connected to that object by some e x i s t e n t i a l r e l a t i o n . C e r t a i n l y " I " f i t s into t h i s analysis, since the speaker is i m p l i c i t to the act of utterance ( i . e . i s e x i s t e n t i a l l y related to the instance of discourse); but In what way is "s/he" e x l s t e n t i a l l y related to the object i t represents? Rather the t h i r d person c a l l s attention to the code i t s e l f by r e f e r r i n g to the p o s s i b l i t y of language to name the absent or f i c t i o n a l person. It Is for t h i s reason that I characterize the use of the t h i r d person as a metalingual function. (See Jakobson, "Metalanguage as a l i n g u i s t i c problem" 116: "A metalanguage i s a language in which we speak about the verbal code i t s e l f . " ) /12/ Cf. Jacques Derrida in The S t r u c t u r a l i s t Controversy, 155: When I look for the present of discursive time, I don't fi n d i t . I find that t h i s present Is taken not from the time of the §nonclation but from a movement of temporalization which poses the difference and consequently makes the present something complicated, the product of an o r i g i n a l synthesis which also means that the present cannot be produced except in the movement which retains and effaces i t . 26 /13/ Jakobson's use here of the word ' d u p l i c i t y ' refers to the duplex functioning of message and code which "...may at once be u t i l i z e d and referred to (= pointed a t ) " ("Shifters" 130). /14/ Kristeva, in "Instances du discours" 78-79, r e c a l l s Jakobson's d e f i n i t i o n of s h i f t e r s : "des pronoms dans l a locution ... qui translatent le code dans le message, le proces. de l'e'nonce dans le proces de 1'enonciation, les divers protagonistes de l'un dans l'autre et vice versa". She adds: "C'est done dans l a locution elle-me'me que les pronoms jouent le role d'£changeurs entre divers niveaux et aspects de l'acte et du systeme l i n g u i s t i q u e . La f i c t i o n ne f e r a i t alors que mettre en evidence le caractere de charniere de ces instances, en faisant jouer les translations noh seulement entre code et message, §nonc§ et enonciation, mais dans tous les sens et 3 1*interior de chacune de ces d i v i s i o n s " . /15/ Note the double meaning of t h i s word: 1. unimportant 2. non-signifying. /16/ See Helene Cixous, "Le Sexe ou l a tete?", in Les Cahiers  du GRIF 13 (1976): 5-15, for a discussion of the Realm of the Proper, i d e n t i f i e d with the male; and Luce Irigaray, "Ce sexe qui n'en est pas un", Ce_ sexe qui n' en est pas un (Paris: Editions de Minuit, 1977). /17/ Or man, of course. 27 Oriana F a l l a c i ' s Lettera a un bambino ma 1 nato II f a t t o e che come ogni altra f a t i c a , ogni altzo lavoxOf quando un libzo e' concluso vive di vita propria. E diventa cio' che vi vedono gli altzi. Non e' piu' c i o ' che l'autoze voleva che fosse. F a l l a c i , dustjacket of Un Uomo, 1979 . 1. Lettera a un bambino mai nato/1/, l e t t e r to an unborn c h i l d , l e t t e r to a male c h i l d , never born. A l e t t e r without names, without dates, a f i c t i t i o u s series of diary entries to take the place of a j o u r n a l i s t ' s report on abortion/2/, to stand in for, substitute what was asked for and paid for in the work-place: a stolen manuscript, robbed from the commissioning editor and given to another/3/, almost as i f the woman who wrote i t was depriving the r i g h t f u l father of his progeny, w i l l f u l l y i l l e g i t i r a i z i n g her offspring by bringing into the world an inappropriate response to his desire and then giving i t away to another, refusing payment, breaking the contract, stepping outside of pro p r i e t a l etiquette. A marginal text, then, c a l l i n g i t s e l f a l e t t e r , written as a diary, published as l i t e r a t u r e , sold as a best-s e l l e r / 4 / , by a jou r n a l i s t who has been refused the t i t l e of writer./5/ The dustjacket warns that "questo l i b r o diverso da ogni a l t r o n e l l a forma e n e l l a sostanza sara' una grossa sorpresa pei l e t t o r i d i Oriana F a l l a c i , cioe' d e l l a F a l l a c i che racconta l a guerra In Niente e cos 1' s i a o attacca i l potere in Intervista con l a s t o r i a . " Both in form and content, t h i s text breaks not only with l i t e r a r y genre and property rules; 28 i t also steps out of the t r a d i t i o n established by the author's production by turning down the themes of history and power, those privileged arenas of male prerogative. Instead, i t transcribes a nameless, hi s t o r y - l e s s woman's voice, situated outside of time and place./6/ This i s not the f i r s t time that F a l l a c i has chosen to write in the f i r s t person/7/, nor as an " I " addressing i t s e l f to a "you". For example, in Intervista con l a s t o r i a (161-2) - a series of transcribed and amplified interviews with "history-makers" of the day - she s l i p s into a d i a l o g i s t i c "we" versus "you" passage, as she questions the aims of Dr. George Habash's Popular Front: L'uomo che avevo dinanzi era l'uomo cui s i dovevano, a quel tempo, gran parte degli a t t e n t a t i in Europa. Ecco che discorso: io sono venuta a c a p i r v i , a cercaz d i c a p i r v i attraverso i miei dubbi. ... Anche noi abbiamo t i p ! che mettono bombe: pero' non le mettono in casa vostra, e non li consideriamo eroi. But in t h i s example (as i n a l l her other works, with the exception of Lettera). personal pronouns are e a s i l y attached to the referred person: there i s no room for doubt as to the id e n t i t y of "we" Europeans, as opposed to "you" Palestinian t e r r o r i s t s . History and power are pr e c i s e l y what pin F a l l a c i * s writing down, obsessive themes serving to anchor the jo u r n a l i s t into the here-and-now, constraining, taunting, 29 l i m i t i n g the imaginative and creative talents of the "writer". From taped interviews, to in-depth d i a r i s t i c accounts of her experiences with the NASA space program, and in the midst of f i g h t i n g during the Vietnam war, to her 600-page roman v6 r i t e describing the imprisonment, tortures, and subsequent murder of Greek p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i s t Alessandro Panagulis, F a l l a c i pursues her obsessive search for the v i r i l e male hero, an image imprinted in her c u l t u r a l memory-bank as a thirteen-year old member of the Resistance during the Second World War: Ti ho g i a ' detto che ammiro guel tipo d'uomo: e' allora? Devo essere condannata? S i ' , s i ' , forse sono un po' ossessionata dal coxaqqio. Nella mia vita e' successo qualcosa, un trauma, quand'ero una ragazzina. II trauma del fascismo, il trauma della Resistenza. Ha marchiato la mia vita, moralmente e culturamente, e guesto non lo posso cambiare. Playboy 37. F a l l a c i was never a feminist. She was too affected by the "heros" who passed through her house during war-time: partisans or escaped prisoners of war, they were never perceived as scared boys, but rather as comic-strip supermen. A "man" for F a l l a c i i s an independant being, an extra-ordinary ind i v i d u a l who i s impervious to s o c i a l conditioning and who stands outside s i g n i f y i n g practices: he is a god, creator, inventor./8/ A woman can aspire to nothing better than to become such a She-man. F a l l a c i i s nauseated and t i r e d of feminists, offended by the i r v i c t i m i s a t i o n complex, and aliented by their fanaticism./9/ But neither does she f e e l at ease with more t r a d i t i o n a l l y 'feminine' roles. In Se i l sole muore, dining in 30 a restaurant on Mother's Day, F a l l a c i feels l i k e a dangerous element, a subversive symbol for the mothers that surround her: "E intanto mi affogavano nel loro Niagara d i l a t t e , papa 1, mi scudisciavano con l a loro f e r t i l i t a ' prorompente, lapidandomi a ogni sussurro c o l rimprovero d i mille bambini mai n a t i " (405). Drowned in t h e i r maternal milk, lashed by their f e r t i l i t y , stoned by their whispering disapproval of a thousand unborn children, as F a l l a c i describes her experience she also proclaims her Otherness, her absolute denial of a female i d e n t i t y . A l l the more surprising, then, that she should write t h i s f i c t i o n a l monologue that struggles with the s p e c i f i c difference b i o l o g i c a l l y afforded by the female body and with the uniquely female destiny of pregnancy and miscarriage./10/ 2. 12 d i a r i o e' i l 2uogo che r i s a r c i s c e gue22o che 2a v i t a non consente. Lo spazio in cui c i s i riappropria di un'identita' spezzata nel contzonto con 2'esterno, con 2'altro. 12 2uogo infi n e dove e' p o s s i b i l e dare voce a2 si2enzio femmini2e senza venire a p a t t i con l ' l s t i t u z i o n e l e t t e z a r i a . Rasy 104. If , as Rasy writes, the diary i s the place that compensates for what l i f e does not consent to; the space in which one reappropriates an i d e n t i t y broken down in the face of the external, the other; and f i n a l l y , the place to give voice to female silence without coming to terms with the l i t e r a r y i n s t i t u t i o n , then how are we to characterize the f l e t i o n a l diary? 31 The d i a r i s t i c " I " stubbornly denies the ar b i t r a r i n e s s of the sign in a f u t i l e attempt to locate and give form to the writing subject. But in the very tracing of the s i g n i f i e r the ori g i n - a t i n g " I " and the writing " I " s p l i t , are cleaved onto opposite sides of language and meta-language, and uprooted from th e i r o r i g i n a l time / place coordinates, make the i r temporary residence in the multiple instance of reading: even when read by i t s own writer, the writing and reading " I " are separated by a spatio-temporal d i f f e r e n c e . / l l / There is no denying, then, the f i c t i o n a l status of the diary; there i s no possible safe-house in which the d i a r i s t i c " I " may seek refuge from the insidious e f f e c t of the s i g n i f i e r to f a l s i f y the authenticity of a transcendentally located, unified s e l f . The f i c t i o n a l , d i a r i s t i c " I " thus stands twice removed from the l i n g u i s t i c Eden of a Self present to i t s e l f in i t s own speech, un-re-presented and therefore uncodified, s e l f - c o n s t i t u t i n g without, and outside of, the i n s t i t u t i o n s that coin and c i r c u l a t e those very re-presentations. The f i c t i o n a l d iary i s a mock auto / qraphia, mocking both the yearning for a s e l f -p r e s e n t - t o - i t S e l f , transparently evident and unclouded over by language, as well as mocking the l i t e r a r y i n s t i t u t i o n ' s desire for a consumable product, put out and patented by the Author-writer. "This i s (and I am) a f i c t i o n that i s not a f i c t i o n " , i t seems to say, d e l i b e r a t e l y confusing the reader's sense of pronominal propriety, i n v i t i n g i d e n t i f i c a t i o n while pushing i t away, laying out markers for the reader to follow and i d e n t i f y 32 while, at the same time, covering up i t s traces, destroying the imprints of i t s track, obfuscating both i t s ontological status and i t s l i t e r a r y legitimacy. The ideal discursive t a c t i c , then, for a female jo u r n a l i s t who wants to write a story outside of History, who wants to describe a "herstory" while circumventing the power of l i t e r a r y d i c t a t e s . 3. Ci s i a f f i d a a l discorse d i r e t t o , immediate, a l parlare in prima persona, come se la voce, i suoi toni p o r t a t i a forza sulla pagina, potessero garantire l a donna sczivente dal pozzo oscuro d e l l a s c r i t t u r a , dove capita a maschile e femminile di annegare in un'identica morte. Rasy 32. Stanotte ho saputo che c'eri: una goccia di vita scappata dal nulla. Me ne stavo con gli occhi spalancati nel buio e d'un t r a t t o , in quel buio, s'e' acceso un lampo di certezza: s i ' , c ' e r i . E s i s t e v i . ... [M]i sono accorta di pr e c i p i t a r e in un pozzo dove tutto era incerto e terrorizzante. Ora eccomi qui, chiusa a chiave dentro una paura che mi bagna il volto, i c a p e l l i , i p e n s i e r i . E in essa mi perdo. (7) Being and nothingness, certainty and uncertainty, l i g h t and blackness, You and I. Two concentric c i r c l e s , You inside me, Us locked within "the dark well of writing", are chambers of fear in which I lose(s) my/itSelf were i t not for the bright certainty of Your existence: " c ' e r i ; s i ' , c ' e r i ; e s i s t e v i . " That nothingness that t e r r o r i z e s , o b l i t e r a t i n g even the graphic mention of "I"/12/, i s silence/13/, to be warded o f f , kept at bay by this voice: "Ora eccomi qui...". Now, here I am. But when, and where? " I " 's location, l o s t 33 somewhere in a dark well of fear, is traceable only through the marks of these words. Now, here, l e t my writing give the l i e to nothingness, because " I " fear(s) nothing but s i l e n c e , because "nulla e 1 peggiore del n u l l a " (8), and what t e r r i f i e s me is not death, not pain, not the others, but " i l niente, i l non e s s e r c i , i l dover dire d i non esserci stato..." (8). " I " speak(s), conjuring up a "you", a you that s h a l l remain voiceless and s i l e n t , trapped within the echoing double chamber of my body and the dark well of writing, a senseless spark of being, started perhaps, l i k e the universe i t s e l f , in error (9-10), but providing, a l l the same, the p o s s i b l i t y for my discourse: an i n v i s i b l e , mute interlocutor, allowing " I " to take i t s bearings and carve i t s i n i t i a l s into the e x i s t e n t i a l walls e n c i r c l i n g the well of fear./14/ 4. Non puoi mica parlarmi. (7) l o t i parlo, bambino, e tu non lo sai. (16) Cosa d a r e i , bambino, per rompere i l tuo mutismo, penetrare nella prigione che t i avvolge e che avvolgo, cosa darei per vederti, ascoltare la tua risposta! (26) Speechless infant, in-£ans, You can't t a l k , can't know (or know everything already/15/), wrapped up in that prison that I wrap(s) up, which I would l i k e to break into to extricate your voice, to tear through the very tissues of my own body in order to hear your answer, in order to see you face to face. ('"I" speak(s), say(s) my/itSelf and simultaneously hear(s) echoed back the voice of "you", a voice 34 that paradoxically originates with, and within, the i s o l a t i n g confines of "me".' ("Subject As Pronoun" 6) Were " I " to give b i r t h to "you", f l i p p i n g the membranes of this echoing chamber inside out, reversing the reversible sides of t h i s communication act, our positions would be exchanged on the self-same axis; and yet, " I " need(s) "you", need(s) to have confirmation of your person in order to know mySelf existent. That i s why " I " interrogate(s) mySelf incessantly on the exact moment that l i f e begins, in an exasperated attempt to att r i b u t e consciousness to the Other: "Al l o r a dimmi, tu che sai tutto: quando incomincia la vita? Dimmi, t l supplico: e' davvero cominciata l a tua? Da quanto?" (26) Perhaps i f " I " trace(s) out a composite drawing, giving v i s u a l form to an i n v i s i b l e s i l e n c e , l i t e r a l l y constructing the body of You? Here, your photograph, see your head, your mouth, your eyes, a dorsal spine, a nervous system, a stomach, l i v e r , intestines, lungs, and even that a f f e c t i v e centre, your heart (9), look at them. "Non era proprio l a tua f o t o g r a f i a , evidente: era quella d i q u a l s i a s i embrione d i tre settimane..." (9). No matter that You i s any "you", a p l u r a l l z e d , anonymous other, because what i s important Is only that "you" be, s e t t i n g up a p o l a r i t y to balance the symmetrical necessity of my discourse. And then, the v i s u a l obsession, scopophilic desire. A woman alone in a room pastes up images ripped out of a magazine, w i l l i n g form and contour onto a presence she i s 35 never sure e x i s t s , making v i s i b l e the unseen, c o n c r e t i z i n g a fantasm of h e r S e l f : " G l i innamorat i l o n t a n i s i conso lano con l e f o t o g r a f i e . Ed io ho sempre i n mano l e tue f o t o g r a f i e . E ' d i v e n t a t o ormai u n ' o s s e s s i o n e " (18) . "Ho r i t a g l i a t o l a f o t o g r a f i a . . . . L ' h o a t t a c c a t a a l muro, e q u i d a l l e t t o l a ammiro: o s s e s s i o n a t a d a i t u o i o c c h i " (34) . The eyes become the i n d i c a t o r of c o n s c i o u s n e s s : "Da quando so che h a i c h i u s o g l i o c c h i mi sembra che t u non p r e s t i a t t e n z i o n e a c i o ' che t i r a c c o n t o , che t i c u l l i i n una s p e c i e d i i n c o s c i e n z a " (52) . What they see ("L'acqua e bas ta? Le p a r e t i d e l l a p r i g i o n e e bas ta?" (34 ) ) , how they see , whether they see at a l l . A mania to see and be seen , as i f by p o s i t i n g an i n d e x i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , an i m a g i s t i c one- to -one correspondence between "you" and " i t " / the photograph , the image i t s e l f might take the p l a c e of b e i n g , and c o n j u r e up the o t h e r ' s presence through a p a n t h e i s t i c r i t e , t u r n i n g any "you" i n t o You / my Other through a m a g i c a l t r a n s m u t a t i o n from s i g n i f i e r to s i g n i f i e d , i n the b e l l y of "I" . 5. C e r t o siamo una ben stzana c o p p i a , i o e t e . T u t t o i n te depende da me e t u t t o i n me depende da t e ; . . . . P e r o ' i o non posso comunicare con te e tu non puoi comunicare con me. In quella che e' fozse la tua sapienza i h f i n i t a , non conosci nemmeno la faccia che ho, l'eta' che ho, la lingua che pazlo. Ignozi da dove vengo, dove mi t r o v o , cosa faccio nella vita. Se tu volessi immaginazmi, non avzesti neanche un elemento per indovinaze se sono bianca o neza, giovane o vecchia, alta o bassa. Ed io mi chiedo ancoza se s e i o no una p e r s o n a . Mai due e s t r a n e i l e g a t i alio stesso destino fuzono piu' estzanei di noi. Mai due sconosciuti u n i t i nello stesso cozpo fuzono p i u s c o n o s c i u t i , p i u ' lontani d i noi. (26) 36 S t r a n g e c o u p l e t h a t we a r e , r e a d e r . L i n k e d t o g e t h e r b y t h e s e w o r d s , " I " c a l l ( s ) t o " y o u " , i n v i t e ( s ) y o u r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e p r o n o m i n a l p l a y , p r o f f e r ( s ) t h e mask o f p e r s o n , p u l l ( s ) y o u i n t o t h e r e v e a l i n g / c o n c e a l i n g game o f p r o n o m i n a l h i d e - a n d - s e e k , and y e t . . . " I " d i s c l o s e ( s ) no s e c r e t s , and w hat " I " m a k e ( s ) known i s n o t h i n g more t h a n my a l l o c u t i o n a r y l o c a t i o n : "sono una d onna che l a v o r a " (10), "sono una d o n n a c h e ha s c e l t o d i v i v e r e s o l a " (11), no more t h a n t h a t . L e t me t a u n t y o u w i t h my unknowns: s e c r e t k n o w l e d g e i s t h e o n l y power t h a t I h ave i n t h i s a t t e m p t t o w r i t e m y S e l f w i t h o u t m a k i n g p u b l i c my f e a r . D o ( e s ) " I " t e a s e y o u w i t h t h i s game o f T w e n t y Q u e s t i o n s ? " I f y o u w a n t e d t o i m a g i n e me..." What i s " I " *s f a c e l i k e , what i s my a g e , m o t h e r - t o n g u e ? Where d o ( e s ) " I " come f r o m , where i s " I " now, what d o ( e s ) " I " do f o r a l i v i n g ? Am " I " b l a c k o r w h i t e , y o u n g o r o l d , t a l l o r s h o r t ? And You, a r e y o u a p e r s o n ? S t r a n g e c o u p l e , i n d e e d , bound t o g e t h e r b y t h e p r o f f e r m e n t o f d i s c o u r s e , s p o k e n t h r o u g h t h e w o rds o f e a c h O t h e r , t a k i n g on d e f i n i t i o n o n l y t h r o u g h t h e d e f i n i n g a x e s and t h e p o l a r i z i n g e f f e c t o f i n s t a n t s u b s t a n t i a t i o n i n s p e e c h , y e t r e m a i n i n g , a l l t h e same, s t r a n g e r s , u n k n o w n ( s ) t o e a c h ( ' s ) O t h e r . And t h i s b o d y , b o d y o f w o r d s , t e x t u a l c o r p u s t h a t u n i t e s u s , e n v e l o p p i n g us i n i t s web o f n a r r a t i v e n e c e s s i t y , i t d o e s no more t h a n v e i l t h e d i s t a n c e t h a t s e p a r a t e s " I " f r o m " y o u " . A s e r i e s o f c o n s t r a i n i n g t i s s u e s , c a r t i l a g i n o u s s t r u c t u r e s , 37 fibrous sinews of plot/16/, en-joining us to the commands of the text yet leaving us no l i n e of communication, no p o s s i b l i t y to break free of their d i r e c t i v e s , to p u l l up the slack and to tear back the s i g n i f y i n g v e i l of printed words that, as i t binds us together, divides us so irrevocably. "Io non posso comunicare con te e tu non puoi comunicare con me."/17/ This textual body (my words, " I " 's words) form a connecting passage not only between the within and without of pronominal s u b j e c t i v i t y , transmitting thought from language to meta-language, i t also tunnels out a hollow chamber between writer and reader, to be f i l l e d in by our appropriations. It i s a sort of connecting chamber that makes known and makes commonly shared the distance that l i e s between us. A dark well, then, that " I " and "you" construct with our discursive act, and that we peer into and across, l i k e moles in a burrow, ceaselessly o f f e r i n g up our bodies for the Other to inhabit, incessantly writing our l i t e r a r y corpus in the hope of f i l l i n g in or having f i l l e d in that empty communicating passage. 6. Non mi piaceva allinearmi con le donne dalla pancia gonfia; non avevo nulla in comune con loro. Nemmeno la pancia. (56) Sopra di me c'e' un s o f f i t t o bianco e accanto a me, dentro un bicchiere, ci sei tu. ... Ti guardo, finalmente. E mi sento beffata perche' non hai proprio nulla in comune con il bambino della f o t o g r a f i a . Non sei un bambino: sei un uovo. (98) Nothing in common, neither I with those other pregnant women, nor you with a l l the other normal foetuses. You are/is 38 a dev iat ion from "quals ias i embrione"; any baby is not you, baby, and the common c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s that "you" share with "them", the communicating, in ter lapping t e r r i t o r y , is n i l . In f a c t , you a r e / i s not even a baby after a l l . That scopophi l i c fever has f i n a l l y been assuaged. I have/has you within s ight at l a s t , and as I look(s) at you f i n a l l y , a glass containing an egg, in turn containing you, I ask(s) myself why i t i s that every enclosure that I come up against i s a c i r c l e within a c i r c l e , concentr ic d u p l i c i t y to close me i n , to seal off any hope of ever f ind ing a communicating passage, something in common with the Other(s ) . 7. Stanotte ho par la to con tuo padre. G l i ho detto che c'eri. Gliel'ho detto a l telefono perche• s i trova lontano e, a g iudicare da guel lo che ho ud i to , non g l i ho dato una buona notizia. Ho udi to , a n z i t u t t o , un profondo s i l e n z i o ; neanche fosse caduta la comunicazione. (16) To hear s i l ence is a formidable task, worthy of a Zen master. I wonder what can be more profound: the s i l ence of i s o l a t i o n when trapped ins ide the concentric r ings of Selfhood, or the s i l ence I hear(s) when I ta lk ( s ) to "him"? Perhaps the telephone l ines may provide a l i n k ; but "neanche fosse caduta l a comunicazione", not even i f the l ine had been cut of f , not even i f the telephone had gone dead, or the connection,been severed, not even i f the communication had "fa l len" away, would the s i l ence have been so deeply and u t t e r l y complete. 39 S i l e n c e and i m m o b i l i t y appear as p a r a l l e l images and f e a r s t h r o u g h o u t t h i s body of words, l i k e o l d r e g r e t t e d t a t t o o s or u g l y c h i l d h o o d s c a r s , h i d d e n i n some obscure and f l e s h y ( t e x t u a l ) f o l d . L e t t e r a i s "about" pregnancy and c h o i c e , "about" women's r i g h t t o t h e management of t h e i r own b o d i e s ; i t i s the s t o r y of one woman's s t r u g g l e t o l i v e i n d e p e n d e n t l y and come t o terms w i t h the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of g i v i n g b i r t h t o a n o t h e r l i f e ; i t i s the t a l e o f . . . . Yes, a l l t h a t t o o , but when I l i s t e n t o t h e harmonic p i t c h e s , w h i s t l i n g above and t h r o u g h t h i s f a c e l e s s monologue, I hear l o u d e r t h a n any o t h e r s the f r u s t r a t e d tones of a disembodied v o i c e l a m e n t i n g a broken or i m p o s s i b l e c o n t a c t , and w i l l i n g i n t o e x i s t e n c e , t h r o u g h the sheer f o r c e of language, t h a t l i f e l i n e t o the O t h e r . C a l l i t a communicating passage or a c o n n e c t i n g t u n n e l ; c a l l i t a s e p a r a t i n g h o l l o w , i f you w i l l , t h i s l i n e of communication i s no b e t t e r evoked than as an u m b i l i c a l c o r d , t r a n s m i t t i n g s u s t e n a n c e and l i f e b l o o d from " I " t o "you": a m e t a p h o r i c a l t r a n s v e r s a l c o n n e c t i n g w i t h i n and w i t h o u t , r u n n i n g back and f o r t h , l i k e d i s c o u r s e , between the S e l f and the Other. 8 . Qello che non capisco e' pezche', quando una donna annuncia di essere legalmente incinta t u t t i s i mettono a f a r l e f e s t a . . . Con me rimangono f e r m i , z i t t i , o fanno discorsi sull'aboztire. ( 2 2 ) L u i e' r i m a s t o z i t t o e fezmo: un'ombza alta e scuza contzo il bianco della pazete. (53) S t i l l and s i l e n t , s i l e n t and s t i l l : I am/is surrounded by 40 fantasm-like shadows, insubstantial presences that menace by th e i r immobile quiet. When "he" l e f t , "col suo passo deciso, senza che io lo fermassi", i t was almost as i f "non avessimo piu' nulla da d i r c i " ( l l ) , and t h i s lack of dialogue, t h i s nothing-to-say-to-each-other, is a haunting recurrence, making the pseudo dialogue with "you" a l l the more imperative. As I l i s t e n ( s ) , without speaking, to "he"'s pleading, my/her silence is misinterpreted as complicity: "incoraggiato dal fatto che a s c o l t a s s i z i t t a . . . " (17). Twice their telephone conversations end cut o f f , interrupted by s i l e n c e : "Ho posato una seconda volta i l recevitore senza a s c o l t a r l o " (22). No wonder that "I"'s love objects in the past have been nothing more than "fantasmi deludenti d i una r i c e r c a sempre f a l l i t a " (17): ghostly, speechless constructs of a gigantic swindle perpetrated by the p r i e s t s , b i l l b o a r d s , l i t e r a t u r e , and p o l i t i c i a n s , in order to keep people distracted and well-behaved (17). In fact, the father's words are e n t i r e l y ignored and dismissed, both over the phone and in person, u n t i l he commits them to graphic form; then his l e t t e r is quoted in entirety, i s considered worthy of r e f l e c t i o n and manages to enter into "I"»s dialogue with herSelf (94-95), as i f only the written takes on s o l i d i t y and emerges from the world of fantasms and shadows; as i f only the written has true authority in "I"'s universe. 9. Due settimane immobili, a l e t t o , sono troppe. ... [E'J subentrata una specie di spossatezza, un'ansia 41 che assomiglia all'angoscia. (51) Siamo all'ospedale. Una camera tziste di questo mondo t r i s t e . Ci siamo da una settimana che ho trascozso quasi sempre dormendo, obnubilata dai seditavi. ... II silenzio mi abbzutisce e mi schiaccia. (61) Immobility leads to an anguish-like anxiety, while silence brutalizes and weighs " I " down. " I " l i e ( s ) for two weeks, groggy and sedated, between sleep and awake. Denied newspapers, t e l e v i s i o n , telephone and v i s i t o r s , " I " am/is reduced to a brutish, animal-like state. The silence that i s imposed on me/her closes in and surrounds l i k e a cage which the white-clad keeper enters only to give injections of hormonal drugs. Without exchange of speech, locked into t h i s s i l e n t prison, even the keeper i s reduced to the l e v e l of brutes: "prigioniera d i una belva v e s t i t a d i bianco..." (61). Non ho zisposto nulla. Non ho fatto un gesto. Non ho battuto un c i g l i o . Sono rimasta l i ' con un corpo che era p i e t r a e s i l e n z i o . Anche i l cezvello era pietra e silenzio. Non si annidava un pensiero, una pazola. L'unica sensazione era un peso insoppoztabile sopra lo stomaco, un piombo invisibile che mi schiacciava come se il cielo mi fosse p r e c i p i t a t o adosso: senza far rumore. (75) The woman doctor informs " I " that the foetus i s dead: "I"'s/my response is immobility and silen c e , a body of stone and silence, a mind of stone and s i l e n c e , where not a single thought, not single word is lurking. The death of "you" not only puts an end to dialogue and speech, i t puts an end to the very functioning of the body, so that the month of immobility was only a prelude to the death-like state that follows when the Other is no more. When " I " search(es) for the baby during 42 the t r i a l scene, "dentro l a gabbia, fu o r i d e l l a gabbia, a l d i l a ' degli scanni, per t e r r a , sui muri", " I " am/is unable to locate him. What I find(s) instead is only "una quiete d i tomba" (88). This tomb-like hush i s p r e c i s e l y what i s l e f t to " I " when dialogue becomes monologue, when the i m p l i c i t "you", summoned up by pronominal posing in the instance of discourse, remains hidden behind the " I " . Yet, i t is at the very moment that "you" i s no more, when " I " r e a l i z e s the Other was not another person - a substantiated presence outside herSelf -but rather simply the other pole that makes speech possible, i t i s at that moment that " I " continue(s) to talk nevertheless: "Tu non renascerai mai piu'. Non tornerai mai piu'. E' continuo a p a r l a r t i per pura disperazione" (92). 10. Cio' che vedo in te non sei te: sono io.' Ti ho a t t r i b u i t o una coscienza, ho dialogato con te, ma l a tua coscienza era la mia coscienza e i l nostro dialogo era un monologo: il mio! Basta con questa commedia, basta con guesto d e l i r i o . (62) It is the d e l i r i o u s play of person, the exchange of pronominal masks that i s so dangerous and that " I " long(s) to put an end to in order to reappropriate and proper-tize the boundaries and confines of my/herSelf. Hence " l " ' s frustrated imperatives to unmask the nature of my/her discourse: monologue disguised as dialogue, "questa commedia, questo d e l i r i o " , a d e l i r i o u s play of person as the writing s e l f c a l l s up the absent Other in an attempt to make 'mine' into 'ours'. The struggle to Individuate " I " from "you" runs 43 throughout the text, from "I"'s promise to separate body from mind, giving body to the Other and retaining mind for herSelf (59), to comments such as: "Tu prenderesti i l mio posto nel mondo e io mi r i p o s e r e i " (59); " t i i n s i n u a s t i in me come un ladro, e mi rapi n a s t i i l ventre, i l sangue, i l respiro. Ora v o r r e s t i rapinarmi l'esistenza intera" (62). "I"'s fears of being obliterated by the Other are summed up s u c c i n c t l y in her account of a s c i e n c e - f i c t i o n novel i n which the protagonist needs only to drink a solution in order to f e r t i l i z e him/herself: "Si t r a t t a d i una normale scissione c e l l u l a r e e, nell'attimo in cui i l protagonista s i scinde, cessa d'esser se stesso: compie una specie d i s u i c l d i o del suo i o " (69). It is t h i s sensation of s p l i t t i n g , of cleaving in two, that leads to " i " ' s obsessive r e p e t i t i o n of the word •coerenza': " t i l mio cervello] ha pensato: 'E* andata come doveva andare. Dunque c i vuole coerenza.' E l a parola coerenza mi ha accompagnato fino a l l ' a l b e r g o , martellante, ossessiva: coerenza, coerenza, coerenza" (76)./18/ " I " need(s) desparately not only to be l o g i c a l l y coherent in my/her thought-processes and actions, but also to be adhesive, to adhere the " I " to the Other, in order to protect my/herSelf against a s u i c i d a l s p l i t t i n g of the ego. 11. S v e g l i a t i , su. Non vuoi? Allora vieni qui, accanto a me. Appoggia la testina su guesto guanciale, c o s i ' . Dormiamo insieme, abbracciati. Io e te, io e te... Nel nostzo letto non entzeza' nessun altzo. (52) 44 S'era infranto un equilibrio, a l suo ingresso. S'era rotta una simmetria, turbata una complicita': guella che esisteva f r a me e te. Bra giunto un estraneo, capisci, e s'era messo fra noi ed era come se ci avesse imposto un mobile di cui non si ha bisogno, anzi inqombra la stanza, togliendo luce, rubando aria, facendo inciampare. (55) Vedremo cosa fare di l u i : a volte un mobile di cui non si ha bisogno finisce col dimostrarsi u t i l e . (68) Equilibrium, a symmetrical, cohesive balancing between " I " and "you" can only be achieved, i t seems, under the threat of a t h i r d intruder. "Let's sleep together, hold on to me, hug me. You and I, you and I... No one else s h a l l enter our bed" (my trans.). There could be no more e x p l i c i t v e r b a l i z i n g of the Oedipal yearning than t h i s incestuous desire on the part of " I " to wrap up the "you" of her l o i n s into her bedding, forbidding and despising the intervention of the father. Perhaps i t i s true, as Kreyder suggests (Kreyder 504), that f i r s t - p e r s o n diary-writing is an expression of the Imaginary Order, an i l l i c t s i g n i f y i n g practice that eschews the meta-lingual manipulation of the f i c t i o n a l third-person as a way of circumventing entry into the Symbolic by denying the a r b i t r a r i n e s s of the sign. Certainly in Lettera the t h i r d Other "he" is purely an antagonistic presence serving to nourish and o f f - s e t the complicity between " I " and, "you", almost as i f in the face of adversity their bond were strengthened. Nor could the treacherous e f f e c t of the t h i r d -person appellation be more cl e a r : " I " likens "he" to an unneeded piece of furniture c l u t t e r i n g up the room, blocking 45 l i g h t , using up a i r . "He" is objectivized, robbed of any-personal status, c o l d l y and p e r s i s t e n t l y t o l d that "he" i s "an outsider" ("un'estraneo") coming between "you" and " I " , a completely useless and e n t i r e l y unwanted object. In a f l i p p i n g of the person in a hypothetical, and therefore not rea l i z e d , statement, " I " elevates "he" to the status of person by addressing him d i r e c t l y as "tu": "Avrei voluto d i r g l i : *Vattene v i a , per favore. Non abbiamo bisogno ne' d i te', ne 1 d i Giuseppe, ne' del Signore Iddio. Non c i serve un padre, non c i serve un marito, tu sei d i troppo'" (55). "He" (or "she") is p r e c i s e l y that: one too many, an unnecessary adjunct to a perfect discursive coupling between complementary poles in the communicative act; one that can admit no other into the origo of th e i r discursive instance. In consonance with the Oedipal yearning, " I " and "you" murder the father by the i r very use of the third-person pronoun, distancing and banishing him from th e i r intimate tete-a-tete. 12. Ti ho s c r i t t o tre fiabe. O meglio, non l e ho proprio s c r i t t e perche' stando a l e t t o non posso: le ho semplicemente pensate. (38) How d i f f i c u l t i t i s to write when the bed remains my prison and only horizon; and were I to write, that act would only displace me farther away from pure expression of mySelf; after a l l , the s i g n i f i e r of the s i g n i f i e r i s such a distant facsimile of the o r i g i n - a l logos, pure speech, present to i t S e l f . Perhaps, instead of writing, i f I think my fables, 46 and communicate my thoughts to you that way? How much closer you would seem: you and I entwined in thought, a Utopian telepathic coupling, undefiled by the necessity for re-presentation, unbesmirched by c o d i f i c a t i o n , circumventing a l l entry into the Symbolic Order and a l l interference from a patriarchal s i g n i f y i n g practice. Let me "simply think" these fables, then, and pretend that writing is nothing more than tr a n s c r i p t i o n , an appearance of thought on the page, scripted by an anonymous hand, some other Author who is not Me. C e r a una volta una bambina innamorata di una magnolia. (38) Quella bambina ero io.... (40) C e r a una volta una bambina cui piaceva molto la cioccolata. (41) E' da quel giorno che io non posso mangiar cioccolata. (44) C e r a una volta una ragazzina che credeva nel domani. (45) Fu lavando le mutande sporche degli altzi che me ne r e s i conto: il nostro domani non era giunto, e forse non sarebbe mai giunto. (49) Try as I might to c r a f t my f i c t i o n a l person, placing her within the venerable discursive frame of the fable, sculpting and g i l d i n g that frame, "Once-upon-a-time...", with the quotation marks of s t o r y - t e l l i n g , t e l l i n g you again and again that I w i l l t e l l you a story ("Te ne racconto una" (40); "Anche questa e 1 una fiaba" (41); "Questa non lo so se e'. una fiaba, ma te l a racconto lo stesso" (45); "Potrei raccontarti una fiaba. E 1 tanto che non racconto una fiaba. Eccola" (69).), t r y as I might to project mySelf onto the f i c t i o n a l co-ordinates of the third-person axes, I s t i l l am/is unable to 47 accept and maintain the f i c t i o n . Four times " I " begin(s), and four times " I " s h i f t ( s ) back onto my own frame of reference, u n t i l , in the end, " I " no longer even attempt(s) to disguise the 'autographical' ( s e l f - d e s c r i p t i v e ) nature of my story: "E revedendoli l e i elemosinava (io elemosinava): 'Mi dai un poco d i luna? Ne hai tanta!'" (70) " L e i " is a f i c t i o n a l stance, a distancing from the Self, assumed from a metalinguistic promontory, an a r t i f i c i a l a r t i f i c e crafted according to authorial instructions, a l i t e r a r y device, f i n a l l y , which " i o " can neither uphold nor sustain. But what is the alternative? 13. Forse e' troppo presto per p a r l a r t i c o s i ' . Foxse dovrei t a c e r t i per ora le brutture e le malinconle, raccontarti un mondo di innocenze e gaiezze. Ma sarebbe come a t t i r a r t i in un inganno. (15) Raccontare, the t e l l i n g of t a l e s , i s , for " I " , tantamount to the spinning of the trama, the fibrous sinews of plot that a t t r a c t and trap "you" into a fraudulent, self-deceiving swindle of an innocent world f u l l of joy. The ruse of the third-person i s equivalent to the ruse of f i c t i o n in general which weaves a fine v e i l of 'story-fied' i l l u s i o n , a con-trap-t i o n which protects and blinds "you" from the ugliness and sadness of l i f e . By rej e c t i n g the f i c t i o n a l contrivance; by l e t t i n g the f i c t i o n a l weave run bare here and there, exposing i t s bald spots in the way that " I " subvert(s) the story-t e l l i n g conventions by l e t t i n g the narrator's " I " poke 48 through; by refusing the narrator's cloak while continuing to narrate, " I " t e l l ( s ) instead a series of lessons, the sum of her knowledge, to pass on to the Other: "E per oggi ho f i n i t o , f i g l i o mio, f i g l i a mia. La lezione t i e' giunta?" (15) The lessons are jealously guarded for your ears only, and i f others should hear, l e t them think of the lessons as f i c t i o n s , harmless fables t o l d to pass the time of gestation away; anything to keep "them" from separating "us". After a l l , in view of the way independent women have predominantly been judged since Eve tempted Adam with the apple of knowledge, determined to leave that Eden of innocence and gaiety: "Chissa' che direbbero alcuni se mi ascoltassero. Mi accuserebbero d'essere pazza o semplicemente crudele?" (15) W i l l "they" accuse me of being crazy, or simply cru e l , for t e l l i n g my truth to you? 49 Notes / l / Henceforth to be referred to as Lettera. A l l quotes from Lettera w i l l be followed simply by a number in brackets. E.g. (23). /2/ "Poi, un giorno, G i g l i o [ F a t t o r i , i l di r e t t o r e d e l l a r i v i s t a Europeo1, mi chiede un lungo reportage sul problema dell'aborto. G l i rispondo: "E se invece del reportage t i s c r i v e s s i un racconto?" ... Mi misi a scriv e r e . Continual per tre mesi. E i l racconto divenne un l i b r o . " ("Una donna chiamata Oriana", Annabella 6 Sept. 1979: 21.) /3/ " t G i g l i o J s i arrabbio'. Dio' se s i arrabbio*. S'offese. "Tre mesi!" protestava. "Tre mesi! E poi non mi ha dato n u l l a ! " ( i b i d . 23). /4/ "Lettera a un bambino mai nato" e' arrivato a l i a ottocentomile copie in I t a l i a , ed e' stato tradotto in ventiquattro lingue." ("I miei p r i v i l e g i : nata povera e donna", Pamiqlia C r i s t i a n a 3 Mar. 1980: 65). /5/ This statement i s based on personal research in I t a l y which attests to complete c r i t i c a l and scholarly silence in regard to F a l l a c i . I t i s also based on comments from newspapers, magazines and booksellers. /6/ Proper noun references are c a r e f u l l y avoided. When the narrator sets off on a t r i p the destination is studiously referred to as " i l paese in cui siamo venuti" (64) or "questo paese" (68). /7/ Apart from Penelope a l i a querra which uses a f i c t i o n a l 3rd person narration, a l l of F a l l a c i ' s work i s written in the f i r s t person, a natural extension of her j o u r n a l i s t i c a c t i v i t y p rimarily as an interviewer. While Se. i_l sole muore, Lettera and Un Uomo a l l make consistent use of a "you" interlocutor, only the "you" and " I " of Lettera are f i c t i o n a l constructs. /&/ "Non riesco a escludere insomma che l a nostra esistenza s i a decisa da pochi, dai bei sogni o dai c a p r i c c i d i pochi, d a l l ' i n i z i a t i v e o d a l l ' a r b i t r i o d i pochi. Quel pochi che attraverso le idee, le scoperte, le r i v o l u z i o n i , le guerre, a d d i r i t t u r a un semplice gesto, l'uccisione d i un tiranno, cambiano i l corso d e l l e cose e i l destino d e l l a maggioranza." (Interview, Playboy Nov. 1981: 8.) /9/ i b i d . 39. /10/ Surprising, also, that Lettera i s dedicated "da una donna per tutte le donne". 50 / l l / Cf. Barthes i n The S t r u c t u r a l i s t Controversy, 140: "When a n a r r a t o r recounts what has happened to him, the I_ who recounts i s no longer the same I_ as the one that i s recounted. In other words . . . the I. of d i s c o u r s e can no longer be a place where a p r e v i o u s l y stored-up person i s i n n o c e n t l y r e s t o r e d . " and "tWlhen I use [ l i b e r e ] the s i g n I_, I r e f e r to myself inasmuch as I am t a l k i n g : here there i s an a c t which i s always new. However, a r r i v i n g a t i t s d e s t i n a t i o n , t h i s s i g n i s r e c e i v e d by my i n t e r l o c u t o r as a s t a b l e s i g n , product of a complete code whose contents are r e c u r r e n t . In other words, the I of the one who w r i t e s I i s not the same as the J_ which i s read by thou" (141). /12/ In I t a l i a n the p e r s o n a l pronoun i s i m p l i c i t t o the verb and need not be s t a t e d except f o r the purposes of disambiguation or emphasis. The f i r s t occurence of ' i o ' i s i n l i n e 11, page 7: "Io non mi euro d e g l i a l t r i " . /13/ "Come f a c c i o a i n t u i r e che non vuoi essere r e s t i t u i t o a l s i l e n z i o ? " (7) /14/ Cf. the metaphor of the w e l l on p.90. The foetus e x p l a i n s h i s r e f u s a l to be born: " G i u n g e s t i a d d i r i t t u r a a s f i d a r m i spiegando c o s ' e r a l a v i t a da v o i : una t r a p p o l a p r i v a d i l i b e r t a ' , d i f e l i c i t a ' , d i amore. Un pozzo d i s c h i a v i t u ' e d i v i o l e n z e c u i non mi s a r e i potuto s o t t r a r r e " . Also Ida Magli (20) r e f e r s to "that famous apologue of the woman f a l l e n i n a w e l l " : "Per l e donne che parlano e s i s t o n o s o l t a n t o a t t r i b u t i n e g a t i v i : p e t t e g o l e , c h i a c c h i e r o n e , m a l d i c e n t i , l a l i n g u a comunque l e p e r d e r a 1 , come insegna i l famoso apologo d e l l a donna caduta n e l pozzo". /15/ "Ma a poco a poco va maturandosi i n me l a c e r t e z z a che tu l i c a p i s c a p e r c h e 1 s a i g i a * t u t t o " (25). /16/ See Laura Kreyder's a r t i c l e , p.500-502, f o r an i n t e r e s t i n g f e m i n i s t a n a l y s i s of the words 'trama' (= woof, yarn; p l o t , c o n s p i r a c y ; p l o t of a n o v e l ; a t t a c k i n g s t r a t e g y ; t i s s u e . Sansoni I t a l i a n - E n g l i s h D i c t i o n a r y , 1979 ed.) and • v e l o 1 (= ve i 1 ) . /17/ Note the v a r i o u s meanings of 'to communicate' (from L a t i n comunicare "to make common", make known, from communis, COMMON): t r . 1. to make known; impart 2. to t r a n s m i t (a d i s e a s e , f o r example) i n t r . 1. to have an interchange as of thoughts or ideas 3. to be connected or form a connecting passage. (American H e r i t a g e D i c t i o n a r y , 1969 ed.) /18/ A l s o r e f e r r e d t o on p.95: "La n o s t r a arnica mi informa che i l bambino e' ancora dentro d i te e r i f i u t i d i l i b e r a r t e n e , q u a s i t u v o l e s s i s e r v i r t i d i l u i per punire l a tua incoerenza e p r o i b i r t i d i v i v e r e " (95). 51 M a r g u e r i t e D u r a s ' s A u r e l i a S t e i n e r Aur£1ia  S t e i n e r A u r e l i a S t e i n e r 1. CAHIER DU CINEMA: Est-ce que tu ne p o u r r a i s d i r e aussi d'Aurilia Steiner comme du Vice-Consul que son m a l , c ' e s t 1 ' intelligence? DURAS: Oui.... Mais une intelligence sans correctif. C. DU C.: Une intelligence folie, litt£ralement. DURAS: Dechalnee. C. DU C.: Elle est folie aussi A u r e l i a S t e i n e r , d'une c e r t a i n e facon. DURAS: Oui, elle est p a r t i e d a n s l a f o l i e . Comme Abraham. C ' e s t g u e l g u ' u n g u i e s t p a r t i . Elle ne s'arretera pas Aurelia S t e i n e r . L e s Yeux V e r t s 89. C. DU C: On peut dire aussi qu'il y a une c r u a u t e g u i passe (dans le f i l m Aurelia S t e i n e r J . DURAS: L'amour. C. DU C.: Ce sont toujours des amours cruels. DURAS: Je n'ai pas choisi. L e s Yeux V e r t s 9 1 . And i f a woman d a r e d t o be b o t h c r a z y a n d c r u e l ? A u r e l i a : " P e t i t e f i l l e . Amour. P e t i t e e n f a n t " ( 1 5 5 ) , y o u a r e c r a z y , g o n e , y o u ' l l n e v e r s t o p ; u n l e a s h e d b y t h a t u n b r i d l e d i n t e l l i g e n c e , y o u p r o p a g a t e y o u r c r u e l l o v e a c r o s s t h e b o d i e s o f y o u r l o v e r s , y o u n g s a i l o r s w i t h b l a c k h a i r and b l u e eyes,« t h o s e t o whom y o u w i l l n e v e r b e l o n g , o r a c r o s s t h e b o d y o f t h e c a t " [ q u i ] r o n r o n n e d u d i s i r f o u d'Aurelia" ( 1 9 8 ) . Why do y o u c r u s h h i m l i k e t h a t w i t h y o u r c a r e s s e s , "a l u i c o u p e r l e s o u f f l e , & l u i f a i r e p e u r " ( 1 7 2 ) , o n l y t o c a l l h i m b a c k w i t h w o rds o f l o v e ? C r u e l l o v e , c r a z y l o v e , p r o p a g a t i n g f e a r , p r o p a g a t i n g madness, p r o p a g a t i n g s i c k n e s s and d e a t h . D e a t h a n d p a i n a r e t h e t e x t ' s s p i d e r w e b . C o m p l i c i t o u s r e a d e r s who succumb to its charm must beware: they may remain in the web for good. K r i s t e v a , "The M a l a d y o f D e a t h " 141 /!/ X.G. -- Et qu'est-ce qu'ils vous ont dit, les hommes? 52 M.D. - - Le mot "malade" r e v i e n t dans chaque lettre. X.G. -- Malade? M.D. — "Je s u i s malade de vous l i r e . " X.G. - - E t l e s femmes, non? M.D. - - L e s femmes a u s s i . X.G. -- De la meme facon? M.D. -- Oui. ... Les P a r l e u s e s 18. Take n o t e , t h e n , of a d i f f e r e n t k i n d of t rama: the D u r a s s i a n web i s a p e r n i c i o u s weave of m o r p h o l o g i c a l t h r e a d s / 2 / t h a t ensnare u n s u s p e c t i n g r e a d e r s i n i t s non-r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l , n o n - n a r r a t i o n a l , n o n - l i t e r a r y p l o t ; an opaque t i s s u e made of interwoven v o i c e s , o f t en f a c e l e s s and nameless , tha t i n s i n u a t e s i t s e l f between speaker and h e a r e r , s u b v e r t i n g the f u n c t i o n i n g of the communicat ive a c t , s t r e t c h i n g out the d i s t a n c e tha t d i v i d e s them, widening and r e n d e r i n g i m p o s s i b l e the b r i d g i n g of the gap t h a t s e p a r a t e s one from the o t h e r : Je ne v o i s pas 1'ecrivain e c r i r e pour tenter d'etablir cette communication par le livre avec les a u t r e s hommes, je le vois en p r o i e ^ lui-m^me, dans ces l i e u x mouvants, limitrophes de ceux de l a passion, impossible a* cerner, a* v o i r , et dont r i e n ne peut l e d e l i v r e r . Duras , Les Yeux V e r t s 80. The dark w e l l of w r i t i n g t h a t Duras i n h a b i t s , " l a chambre n o i r e ou tu n ' e n t r e s pas mais dont tu as p r e s s e n t i 1 ' e x i s t e n c e " / 3 / , t h i s dark room o n l y sensed but never e n t e r e d , h o v e r i n g on the c o n f i n e s of p a s s i o n , i s a s o l i t a r y moving space , c l o s e d i n on i t s e l f , " l i m i t r o p h e " , a b o r d e r i n g s t a t e , thus n e i t h e r here nor t h e r e , i n s i d e of which the w r i t i n g s e l f remains t r a p p e d and i n c a p a b l e of d e l i v e r a n c e , and yet a l s o i n c a p a b l e of p e r c e i v i n g and s e a l i n g o f f the v e r y c o n f i n e s tha t 53 enclose i t . Duras w r i t e s because she cannot help h e r s e l f , because there i s nothing e l s e she can do/4/, but her endeavour i s one of murdering the t e x t , of a c h i e v i n g the u l t i m a t e "mot-absence"/5/, of re d u c i n g the t e x t t o s i l e n c e : Je s u i s dans un rapport de meurtre avec l e cinema. J'ai dej& commence a" en f a i r e pour a t t e i n d r e I 'acquis  c r g a t e u r de la destruction du t e x t e . Maintenant c ' e s t 1'image que je veux atteindre, r£duire. Les Yeux V e r t s 49. Sep a r a t i o n , i s o l a t i o n , madness t h a t manifests i t s e l f as u n i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y , d i s c o u r s e d w i n d l i n g to monologue, monologue to s i n g l e words, d e l i r i o u s r e p e t i t i o n , o b s e s s i v e memory: these are the elements t h a t combine i n Duras's work throughout the "In d i a Song c y c l e " , with the Aure"lia t e x t s arguably c o n s t i t u t i n g a t r a n s i t i o n a l break between these works of a l i e n a t i o n and the w r i t e r ' s l a t e s t p r o d u c t i o n , more a c c u r a t e l y c h a r a c t e r i z e d as works of r e c u p e r a t i o n , i n i t i a t i v e and renewal./6/ As M a r c e l l e M a r i n i w r i t e s i n "L'autre corps", p. 30: fDurasj n'a jamais mis entre parenthese la souffrance qu'est la folie: en c e t t e s o u f f r a n c e , elle a vu d'abord un gain par r a p p o r t £ 1 ' anesthSsie, parfois 1 'hebetude, des i n d i v i d u s et des peuples; depuis l e s Aure~lia S t e i n e r , elle fait de cette souffrance une force positive qui pousse non seulement a* la destruction d'un monde intolerable, mais encore 3 1'invention des maintenant de relations diff&rentes comme de v a l e u r s nouvelles. The A u r S l i a t e x t s occupy a s p e c i a l p o s i t i o n i n the Durassian corpus f o r other reasons as w e l l : C'est vrai que, et qu'on fera 1 j'ai recommence historiquement, quand je serai morte 'histoire de mes Merits, on verra que a* ecr ire avec AurSlia. Comme si 54 quelque chose etait assouvi, une douleur tres grande que je n'avais jamais expzimSe. Marguer it e Duras a Montreal 73. These texts mark a return to writing after ten years almost exclusively devoted to film-making/7/; in a very l i t e r a l sense, then, they are a break with textual silence and a return to the written word. Thus, when Aurelia repeats at the beginning and end of each section " J ' e c r l s " , one hears echoed the wonder and almost sensual enjoyment of the exiled writer returned to the homeland of the graphic word. " L ' S e r i f , writes Duras in Les Yeux Verts (10), "je le retrouve avec Aurelia".78/ 2. A m u l t i p l i c i t y of contradictory sources and motives are described as the o r i g i n of the Aurelia texts: 1. A l ' o r i g i n e d'Auz&lia Steiner, il y a une l e t t r e adressee a guelgu'un que je ne connais pas. ... Avec cette l e t t r e , tout a coup, j'ai recommence a" e c r i r e . Les Yeux Verts, 4. (This l e t t e r is dated July 3, 1979.) 2. Le 25 aout 1979 je trouve 6 c r i t dans mon agenda lune phzasel. ... C'est quelques jouzs apres que j'ai commenc§ Aurelia Steinez. Mais apz&s avoir envoye a guelgu'un l a phrase sur l a mer sur une carte postale hleue. Les Yeux Verts 67. 3. La troisieme Aurelia vient de 1'histoire de Sami Fzey, qui m'a ete zacontee, mais pas par l u i . ... La deuxieme histoize vient d ' E l i e Wiesel, d'un film qui s 'appelle La_ Nui t ... Voila sur les Aurelia. Marguer i t e Duras |. Montreal 40. If the o r i g i n of the Aurelia texts is multiple and contradictory, i t s destinataire, or addressee, is most d e f i n i t e l y i d e n t i f i a b l e . A u r e l i a S t e i n e r i s a l e t t e r (or l e t t e r s ? ) "adress^e a quelqu'un que je ne connais pas"; the sentence about the sea was sent t o "quelqu'un"; and when asked whom she r e f e r s to when she uses the e x p r e s s i o n "vous voyez" i n her t e x t s , Duras r e p l i e s : "Je d i s ca a quelqu'un. Ces t e x t e s - l a , j ' a i commence par l e s d i r e a quelqu'un"/9/. In the broadest sense, then, "vous" must be i d e n t i f i e d with "quelqu'un", t h a t i s to say, someone, anyone, but most d e f i n i t e l y some Other who i s not " I " , not the w r i t i n g s e l f , and not Duras h e r s e l f : La p r e t e n t i o n , c ' e s t de c r o i r e qu'on e s t s e u l devant sa f e u i l l e alors que tout vous arrive de tous l e s c 5 t § s . Bvidemment, les temps sont d i f f e r e n t s , ca vous a r r i v e de plus ou moin loin, ca vous arrive de vous, 9 a vous a r r i v e d'un a u t r e , peu importe, ca arrive de 1'exte'r i e u r . Les L ieux de Marguerite Duras 95. Not o n l y i s the p o s i t i n g of "un a u t r e " , a v o i c e t h a t a r r i v e s "de 1 'exte'rieur", necessary t o w r i t i n g ; i t stands a t the ve r y genesis of ( t h i s ) w r i t i n g . U n l i k e F a l l a c i ' s i n t e r l o c u t o r , " t u " , Duras's other, "vous", i s , even a t the p u r e l y grammatical l e v e l , p l u r a l , formal and d i s t a n t . The Durassian "someone" t o whom to address speech must be allowed the p o s s i b i l i t y f o r p l u r a l i s a t i o n ; s/he must be s i t u a t e d o u t s i d e the w r i t i n g space and o u t s i d e the w r i t i n g body, capable of s h i f t i n g and d i s p l a c i n g a c c o r d i n g t o the c o n t i n u a l l y moving borders ("the p e r i p a t e t i c p e r i p h e r i e s " ) of that i n v i s i b l e , ungraspable place on the c o n f i n e s of p a s s i o n . How s e r i o u s l y should we take 56 Duras's word, then, that: " t E c r i r e ] regarde l ' i n d i v i d u seul. Pour le reste, que le l i v r e s o i t une communication, c'est egal"/10/? That communication between people is impossible, and that they are "irremediably separated"; that t h i s separation is "[une] f i x i t e quasi mathematique'Vll/ and an unbearable torture/12/; that a l l t h i s i s true does not change the fact that the basis and genesis of Duras's writing is an anonymous, unknownable, p l u r a l , distant and absolutely necessary "you"-interlocutor. "Je voulais vous le dire 5 vous..." she writes at the beginning of a fragment in Les Yeux Verts, p.80, i n s c r i b i n g the Other's desire into her own (voulais vous = voulez-vous?); and: Je vous l e dis aussi, on c r o i t ne pas survivre a* l a connaissance de ces donn6es abominables de la separation irremediable entre les gens. Or ce n'est pas v r a i . On y survit. On peut. On peut faire de soi . Les Yeux Verts 23. Perhaps the way to s u r v i v a l , t h i s s o l i t a r y defiance of the "abominable facts concerning the irremediable separation between people", l i e s p r e c i s e l y in the c a l l to the Other through writing, a writing addressed to "vous": "C'est ce que je desire. Que cela vous s o i t destin6" (117). The breakthrough associated with the Aur£lia texts that marks a return to writing is none other than t h i s acknowledgement that the desire for writing (and the desire engendered by writing) is destined, addressed, fated, necessarily directed to "you", and i s , most c l e a r l y , a desire for rapprochement and communication with the Other: 57 Ou etes-vous? Comment vous atteindze? Comment nous f a i r e rapprocher ensemble de cet amour, annuler cette apparente fragmentation des temps gui nous sepazent l'un de l'autre? (118) 3. Aure"lia Steiner Aurelia Steiner Aurelia Steiner, with t h i s name, incantatory r e p e t i t i o n , a t r i p l e evocation of nominal presence, as i f the power of the proper noun, the mere repeated i n s c r i p t i o n of a proper name, were enough to bring into existence a s e l f of one's own: "nom propre" = a proper noun / a proper name / a clean name / one's own name. Hug th i s name to yourself, Aurelia, for in truth, you have nothing else of your own, and nothing else that remains constant across your transmutations but t h i s name which you repeat to yourself and to others or have others repeat to you. Placed on a graph and collated as shown below, these sixty-eight instances, inscribed in 84 pages, define the beginning and end of the f i r s t section as single punctuation marks, swell to a r i s e at the end of the second section, and explode, after tenacious anonymity dotted by a teasing apparition of i n i t i a l s , into a veritable geyser of f i r s t name appellations to close off the third-person, t h i r d section. Were you to plot the progress of your nomination, you would create three separate e f f o r t s , each one a cluster of appellations, and each nebula overlapping the one before in the manner of waves breaking on a beach; a super imposition of swelling proportions, a swell of nominations breaking harder Incidence and Types of Naming in Aurel ia Steiner by Page Number 58 Li-< OJ *cu -•-> c n L. < c n < 1 B 1 cu c "cu ->-> cn a < OJ _c 'cu -t-t c n I I I I I I I o a i ca r*. o3 m CZZZZ - cn - r--- CD CM i - o L. cu -CI E cu o a. 59 and farther up onto the shore of iden t i t y , each of the three waves slapping and d i f f u s i n g with greater strength and greater density of flow, f i l l i n g i n , l i k e a connect-the-dots drawing or a paint-by-numbers p o r t r a i t , an impressionist image of that cl u s t e r of norrts propres that is both "you" and " I " (and "s/he") in t h i s text: Aur6lia Steiner, Aurelia, A.S., Steiner, Steiner Au r e l i a . " [ C)e nom sans sujet" (146), these words c a l l e d out for three days from the end of a hanging rope, "ce scandale" put an end to by a b u l l e t and "repris a i l l e u r s , dans d'autres etages, dans d'autres zones du monde" (159), t h i s name given to a lover as password to penetration, a secret, senseless mantra, mot de puissance to be repeated without understanding (161), t h i s series of marks on a white page (162), i n s c r i p t i o n of race (164), guarantor of parentage and placemarker in History (197)... What more, Aurelia, can your name do, other than generate text and act as matrix for the b i r t h of writing?/13/ 4. Je vous e'er is tout le temps, toujours ca, vous voyez. Rien d'autre que ca. Rien. Je vais peut-Stre vous §crire mi l i e l e t t r e s , vous donner a vous des l e t t r e s de ma vie maintenant. Et vous, vous en f e r i e z ce que je voudrais bien que vous en f a s s i e z , e'est-^-dire ce que vous voulez. C'est ce que je d6sire. Que cela vous soit destinS. (117) Begin then, with writing and desire for writing. Writing, desire for writing, and "you": "you" unidentified, free to roam and f i x i t s appellation on mother, father, lover sea, daughter, l i k e desire i t s e l f or meaning which must be free to c i r c u l a t e , l i g h t i n g on but never landing, endlessly postponed from a f i n a l destination. Stop desire, invest i t in one person and you deaden i t : "La personne est un support passager.... Oui, ce s e r a i t toujours le m£me amour, au depart qui se d6placerait, de personne en personne";..."il y a une sorte de c i r c u l a t i o n , s i vous voulez, de l a jouissance". Fix meaning onto one s i g n i f i e d and you create metaphysics (and God). Attach writing to one source, make i t the property of an Author and i t develops "cette gangue de l ' e c r i t , cette gangue sacralisee"./14/ So t h i s cornucopia of ' s h i f t e r i s a t i o n ' , a maddening p r o l i f e r a t i o n of d e i c t i c signals (such as the 24 instances of ' j e 1 , 'vous', '9a 1 , 'en*, 'ma', 'maintenant 1, 'cela' in t h i s opening passage) i s a way of s t a r t i n g up the c i r c u l a t i o n of jouissance, of inducing a f i e l d of desire through the s e t t i n g up of opposing currents. By f i x i n g speech into writing, thereby l o c a l i s i n g the o r i g i n of language and creating a stable g r i d , while d e s t a b i l i z i n g that grid through the implantation of empty, non-signifying marks that only take on meaning in the instance of reading, desire runs through these opposing currents in a constant movement of appropriation and reference: pronouns r e f e r r i n g back and forward in space and time, personal pronouns continually c i r c u l a t i n g from one character to another, and both incessantly (re-)appropriated 61 by writer and reader(s). The Aurelian universe, in oxymoronic contrast to the rock-like 'stein* that opposes i t , is a labyrinth of f l u i d s , a series of pronominal stop-gaps, s l u i c e s , locks, dams and cascades, channeling i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and location through s h i f t i n g canals that lead into intersecting and confusing junctions, so that the reader f l o a t s from one sense of subject to another, propelled along by the ruses of the s h i f t e r s , and more s p e c i f i c a l l y , by the play of pronouns./15/ 5. On peut dire gue la f i c t i o n produit une permutation incessante des s h i f t e r s . Le procds s i g n i f i a n t est explore selon toutes ses p o s s i b i l i t e s de se structurer en tant gu'acte d'Enonciation (allocution), et en cons6quence le "je" qui nozmalement tzanscende cet acte, a" force de s h i f t e r i s a t i o n et permutation, cesse d'etre un point f i x e localisable, mais devient m u l t i p l i a b l e selon les situations de discours. "Je" n'est plus "un", i l y a plusieuzs "je"-s et done plusieurs "un"-s qui ne sont pas des repetitions du m§me "je" mais de divezses positions (en "tu", en " i l " ) de 1'unite. Kristeva, "Instances du discour" 79. "An incessant permutation of s h i f t e r s " r a d i c a l l y p l u r a l i z e s " j e " , which migrates r e f e r e n t i a l l y between Aurelia, Duras, and reader as well as designating a m u l t i p l i c i t y of f i c t i o n a l c l u s t e r s in the text: she who writes; t r i p l e manifestation at Melbourne, Vancouver, Paris; daughter of s a i l o r ; daughter of hanged prisoner; daughter of mother dead in c h i l d b i r t h in the concentration camp; daughter of mother taken away by the Gestapo; she who l i v e s in a glass room facing a garden; she who l i v e s by the sea; she who l i v e s in a black tower in a forest; 18-year-old; 7-year-old.... The 62 s p l i n t e r i n g and excessive reproduction of pronominal referents not only makes " I " many, i t also makes impossible any fixed, l o c a l i s a b l e point of reference for the reader, who is presented with a m u l t i p l i c i t y of markings, a va r i e t y of possible coordinates to be assumed on the axes of discourse. That i s to say, t h i s ' s h i f t e r i s a t i o n also has for e f f e c t a ra d i c a l s p l i n t e r i n g of the unified persona of "you". " I " offers not one mask in the proferment of discourse, but several, making coincidence between sender and addressee random, and thereby severing contact between the two actors i n the play of speech, who confront each other, masks in hand, unsure at any time which one to don, unsure also who stands before them: "Ou e'tes-vous? Comment vous atteindre?" (118) La multiplication de chacun des shifters discursifs empeche toute the"ologisation du l i e u de 2'"autre" et son unifaction en un mStalangage gui v i s e r a i t £ s a i s i r la conflictualite du proces.... Kristeva, "Instances du discours" 91. If the Other i s unable to at t a i n a monolithic presence, remaining spli n t e r e d , effaced and unknown, prevented, l i k e the play of meaning, from taking fixed residence in any one s i g n i f i e r and thus denied a metaphysical access to being, the Other is equally unable to a t t a i n to a fixed position from which to climb to a metalinguistic promontory. "You" i s thus activated for the purposes of permitting the writing act, but at the same time, i s refused unity, permanence and transcendance as a way of safeguarding the c o n f l i c t u a l movement in t h i s problematic speech act. 63 Comment nous f a i r e nous rapprocher ensemble de cet amour, annuler cette apparente fragmentation des temps qui nous separent l'un de l'autre? (118) • * * On d i t gue vous etes dans une terre Equatoriale ou vous s e r i e z mort i l y a longtemps, dans la chaleur, enterre" dans les charniers d'une peste, dans c e l u i d'une guerre aussi, et aussi dans c e l u i d'un camp de Pologne allemande. (119-120) Both space and time separate " I " from "you", but i t is not the distance between the two that i s unbroachable, so much as the p l u r a l i t y and fragmentation, the continuous s h i f t i n g and mu l t i p l i c a t i o n of i d e n t i t i e s , places, and times that serve as a backdrop for the (Hi)story that w i l l eventually unite them. M.D.— C'est peut-etre ca, l a v i e : entrer dedans, se l a i s s e r porter par cette h i s t o i r e -- cette h i s t o i r e , enfin, 1'histoire des autres — sans cesse mouvement de frapt, de ravissementJ.... C'est ca gui est le mieux, c'est ca le plus souhaitable au monde.... C'est ca qui n'arrive jamais, dans la vie. X.G.— Ou tres , tres rarement . M.D.-- Oui, dans des moments extremes. X.G.— Oui, de rupture, de vacance, de reception.... Si on ne commence pas par Btre envahi par ce vide, par cette b&ance [alors ce n'est pas la peine de continuer 1.... M.D.— C'est le desir? X.G.-- Oui, c'est le desir comme une force qui ne nous appartient pas. Les Parleuses 65. "To enter into, to l e t oneself be ca r r i e d by t h i s (hi)story, others' (hi)story, a constant movement of rapture, of ravishing", t h i s i s the process that Duras sets into motion by t e l l i n g a story f u l l of holes, empty spaces, beances, l e f t by the discontinuous and s h i f t i n g meandering of the narrative, but e s p e c i a l l y by the esse n t i a l blanks whose contours are traced out by the unappropriated d e i c t i c s i g n a l s . This i s the 64 process that "Aurelia" sets into motion by writing a series of l e t t e r s to a blank p o s i t i o n in the discursive act. 6. Jamais. Jamais, je ne vous separe de notre amour. De votre h i s t o i r e . (128) When the " I " of F a l l a c i * s l e t t e r recounts fables to the foetus, the act borders on an autobiographical reconstruction of the important moments in a l i f e , to be passed on as lessons to a future generation. The d i d a c t i c aim of F a l l a c i * s work — experience comes f i r s t , only afterwards does one use language to describe and communicate about i t — goes hand in hand with her attempt to make writing i n v i s i b l e in order to communicate pure experience to the Other, outside of the dominant symbolic order, thus avoiding patriarchal oppression inherent to si g n i f y i n g practices. Lettera also accomplishes t h i s aim by stepping outside of history, by c a r e f u l l y avoiding references to time and place, and by leaving nameless a l l the characters. It marks a j o u r n a l i s t ' s attempt to be free for a short time from the male-dominated arenas of hi s t o r y and power. The Aurelia texts follow an almost d i a m e t r i c a l l y opposed t a c t i c . Not only i s the act of writing made e x p l i c i t , the " I " uses language -- a name and fables told about the name -- in order to construct an i d e n t i t y and reconstruct a history: experience and language are concurrent. The c h i l d Aurelia questions the lady who looks after her; what the c h i l d wants to hear is a story she has heard tens of times before: "Puis l a dame l a i s s e 1'enfant chanter seule et pour l a centieme f o i s 65 l u i raconte" (178). It is a r i t u a l i s t i c pronouncement of words the c h i l d has memorized, but needs to hear spoken by someone else in order that they may take on their incantatory power to define and substantiate her Self: Aurelia a cesse de chanter. Elle 6coute la dame qui contient son histore.... -- Raconte, dit Aurelia -- Elle attend, la dame dort, alors Aurelia lui dicte — "alors elle est mont&e en courant, elle me portait?" etc. (193-4) In less e x p l i c i t terms, Aurelia Vancouver demands the same of her lover. She needs to hear spoken her name, which she writes on a piece of paper, thus concretizing in every way possible the only remnant she retains of a past that has dispossessed her. Hence her pleasure in the s a i l o r ' s addition of "Juden", each r e p e t i t i o n of her name a further locating tag: race or r e l i g i o n , f i r s t name, family name: " I l d i t : Juden, Juden Aurelia, Juden Aurelia Steiner" (163 -4 ) . With each utterance the cluster of a t t r i b u t e s that make up "Aurelia" i s more t i g h t l y bonded and disambiguated: her i d e n t i t y collesces with the thickening density of proper nouns that at the same time f i x her to a more s p e c i f i c location. Unambiguous ident i t y , here, i s a verbal tatoo bestowed exclu s i v e l y by the language of the Other. Two processes are a t work in these texts: f i r s t , an attempt to write desire into narrative by leaving blanks in the pronominal positions and by fragmenting and p l u r a l i z i n g both references to space and time as well as the story/ies itself/themselves; secondly, an attempt to make the personal 66 p o l i t i c a l , to transform the private and individual into a public, generalized experience. This ' c l a s s i c ' feminist approach has been Duras's aim since working on her f i r s t f i l m -s c r i p t Hiroshima, mon amour./16/ "Aurelia", then, whoever she may be, makes of her quest for i d e n t i t y , at once, a quest for love, and a quest for a place in the multiform, endless story of oppression, war and suffering that we c a l l History. It is not surpr i s i n g , then, that the work progresses from an almost nameless monologue, addressed to a "you" dispersed a l l over the globe (among the i s l e s of France, dead in an" equatorial land, buried in a mass grave of plague victims, buried in a mass grave of war victims, l o s t in a Polish-German concentration camp (119-120), struck by the plague In London, k i l l e d In East Germany, in Siber i a , "here" (126), and in a Cracow crematorium (130)), to a named, Jewish " I " , a story l o c a l i s e d to the white rectangle of a Nazi camp; and f i n a l l y , to a third-person, h i s t o r i c a l l y and geographically located account of the su f f e r i n g and anguish experienced by a l i t t l e Jewish g i r l shut-up in a tower during an a i r - r a i d during the Second World War. The accumulative e f f e c t of these three texts, the second one longer than the f i r s t , and the t h i r d one longer than the second, i s a progressive movement of location and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , somewhat l i k e a focussing zoom e f f e c t that closes in from the abstract, blurry image of Aurelia Melbourne to the precise outlines of ftur£lia Paris. The l a s t Aurelia, 67 the only one that Duras has chosen not to bring to f i l m , must, l i k e Lol V. Stein, " r e s t i e r ] intacte, enfermee dans le l i v r e , c lottr6e dedans.comme une proposition absolue et i n t r a n s c r i p t i b l e . Infernale"./17/ She must remain a creation of verbal language because she is already expelled from the i n t e r i o r monologue and fixed into a history, f i c t i o n a l i z e d by the third-person account and at the same time, placed in an object-ivized rendering of war-time persecution. The murderous third-person is here a l i n g u i s t i c echo or p a r a l l e l of that persecution. 7. Vous disiez: des histoizes tralnent le long de ce fleuve, de cette longueur f l u v i a l e s i douce qu'elle appelle a se coucher contre et a" p a r t i r avec e l l e . (132) Ravished by h i s t o r y and the story of others, bourne away by desire, " I " want(s) to l i e with t h i s f l u i d length of ( h i ) s t o r i e s ; l e t i t f i l l me up, penetrate my body with the empty fullness of naming. "Vous auriez remarque ce corps l a i s s e , l i v r e , cette jouissance emportSe l o i n de vous et de laquelle c e l l e - c i ne veut pas revenir" (144). How can I come back to you when t h i s sweetness c a l l s me away, c a l l s me to emerse mySelf in the anonymous flow of time, an eternal r e p e t i t i o n and re-enactment of our b i r t h , separation and death? "Nous devrions nous rapprocher ensemble de l a f i n . / De c e l l e de notre amour. / N'ayez plus peur" (126). As I look(s) at myself in the mirror, "informee de notre 68 ressemblance profonde devant le hasard du d e s i r " (143), our bodies j o i n across the expanse of hunger and madness through the corpse of the leprous cat (134), and i f I ask you "comment f a i r e pour que cet amour a i t ete ve"cu?" (134), i t i s because I already know the answer: " J ' e c r i s " ; and i t is in the act of writing that our love s h a l l be l i v e d , coalesced into marks on a page, so that i t s h a l l never be forgotten or swept away into the flux of "cette longueur f l u v i a l e s i douce...". Dans la chambze fezmee de la plage, seule, je constzuis votre voix. Vous zacontez et je n'entends pas 1'hLstoLze mais seulement votre voix. Celle du dozmeuz mill£naire, votre voix e c r i t e de"sormais, amincie par le temps, delivr6e de l ' h i s t o i r e . (146) Your body that I search for among the s a i l o r s at the port escapes me, so I construct your voice, and as I transcribe(s) i t , alone in t h i s closed room, the story you recount joins the c r i e s of the mad cat outside my window: "Ecoutez... / Quoi? Que d i r a i t - i l ? / Quel mot/ / Quelle designation insensee? / Inepte?" (131) It i s by my act, "votre voix e c r i t e desormais", that your voice i s delivered from the cruel senselessness of h i s t o r y and d i s t i l l e d by time Into t h i s story of "Aurelia Steiner". Je l u i a i parle" longtemps. Je l u i a i raconte l'histoize. Je l u i a i pazl& de ces amants du zectangle blanc de la mort. J'ai chants. Je lui pazlais, je chantais, et j'entendais l'histoize. Je la sentais sous moi, min£rale, de la force irre f r a g a b l e de Dieu. (156) Even i f the events of the past, the l i t a n y of cruelty, hunger, madness and death, is "une force i r r e f r a g a b l e " , a force that cannot be refuted, one that lurks as a monolithic mass beneath me, l i k e God, a " s t e i n - l i k e " , p e t r i f i e d presence that challenges the f l u i d outpouring of my song, there i s s t i l l one way that " I " can subvert i t . 8. As for time, female subjectivity would seem to provide a s p e c i f i c measure that essentially retains repetition and eternity from among the multiple modalities of time known through the history of c i v i l i z a t i o n s . . . . In return, female s u b j e c t i v i t y as i t gives i t s e l f up to i n t u i t i o n becomes a problem with respect to a certain conception of time: time as project, teleology, linear and prospective unfolding: time as departure, progression and arrival — in other words, the time of history. It has already been abundantly demonstrated that this kind of temporality is inherent in the logical and ontological values of any given c i v i l i z a t i o n , that this temporality renders explicit a rupture, an expectation, or an anguish which other temporalities work to conceal. It might also be added that this linear time is that of language considered as the enunciation of sentences (noun + verb; topic-comment; beginning-ending), and that t h i s time rests on i t s own stumbling block, which is also the stumbling block of that enunciation — death. Kristeva, "Women's Time" 16-17. Je ne peux plus, et vous, vous l e comprenez, ecrire une histoize cohSrente, la mener St bien, pr&texter d'un sujet et le developper dans tovt»s ses consequences, depuis les premieres jusgu'aux dernieres. C'est f i n i . Je ne sai s pas comment vous 1'exprimer clairement. Je peux vous dire seulement que pour en a r r i v e r a* tenter par exemple de vous 1'exprimer, je suis tenue d'en passer par une apparente fragmentation de l'£crit, des temps qui le structurent et surtout de constamment desorienter l a d i r e c t i o n de ses composants. From o r i g i n a l Aurelia Steiner l e t t e r , dated July 3, 1979; rptd. in Les Yeux Verts 5. Imagine, then, History as a straight l i n e that runs from Beginning to end, with an arrow placed somewhere along the length to indicate i t s v e c t o r i a l status: t e l e o l o g i c a l l y 70 attuned, proudly project-oriented, a straight arrow s l i p p i n g through Time on i t s journey to the heart of Progress. Linear history with such a prospective is a well-formed sentence unfolding according to the decorum of grammaticality, an anecdote f u l l of (common)sense recounted in order to make sense, a story of protagonists engaged in heroic quests, a t a l e turning the a r b i t r a r y and the unjust into the fated and the necessary, a chronicle that s t a r t s at the beginning and finishes at the end. THE END. This f i n a l rupture provokes an anxious expectation and lends f i n a l i t y to the once-only accomplishment of death: language as a f i n i t e resource, an enunciation clocked by the erosion of time, bound to run out with the dying breaths of speech, and thus linked necessarily with the ethos of production, a lu s t for product and consumption. Now draw beside t h i s l i n e a c y c l i c a l figure, s p i r a l l i n g around on i t s e l f in a rhythmic pirouette, traced against the background of a "monumental temporality, without cleavage or escape, which has so l i t t l e to do with linear time (which passes) that the word "temporality" hardly f i t s . " / 1 8 / How i s one to impose coherent story on t h i s consistently tangential curve that diverges endlessly at the point of i n f i n i t y ? Perhaps i f one were to isolate an arc, fragment the t o t a l i t y , re-produce an approximation of events that take their place on thi s repeating cycle? Syntax decomposes, protagonists s p l i t , d i r e c t i o n i s disoriented, plot loses coherence, sense loses 71 meaning, story r e f r a c t s , repeats, is recounted and re-recounted as i t subtly s h i f t s and displaces the contours of sameness. Aurelia Steiner AurSlia Steiner Aurelia Steiner i s preci s e l y t h i s sort of re-presentation conceived in reaction to and refusal of a linear version of History. When story and history merge, when the pa r t i c u l a r i s only one example of the universal, when a proper name denotes both someone and an unspecified p l u r a l i t y of "anyone"'s, when desire i s l e f t free to c i r c u l a t e among the blanks offered by d e i c t i c p r o l i f e r a t i o n , when "you", "she", and " I " exchange places and masks in a f l u i d re-appropriation that offers no containment, then i t i s just possible that History and God, pain, s u f f e r i n g and death can be refuted after a l l , in the act of writing: " A u r i l i a Steiner dix-huit ans, dans l ' o u b l i de Dieu, se pose en equivalence II Dieu face a elle-meme"./19/ 72 Notes / l / Kristeva, judging Duras's work from a purely c l i n i c a l point of view, pronounces i t dangerous and unhealthy. Other relevant passages from "The Pain of Sorrow in the Modern World: The Works of Marguerite Duras" follow: ...Duras's texts should not be given to f r a g i l e readers, male or female. There is no p u r i f i c a t i o n at the end of these novels laden with disease, no heightened sense of well-being, no promise of a beyond, not even the enchanting beauty of style or irony that would provide a bonus of pleasure beyond the i l l revealed. * • m With neither cure nor God, without value or beauty other than the malady itself, seized at the s i t e of i t s essential fissure, Duras's art is perhaps as minimally cathartic as art can be. Undoubtedly, this is because it stems more from sorcery and bewitchment than from the grace and forgiveness traditionally associated with artistic genius. • * • The " c r i s i s in l i t e r a t u r e " that Valery, Caillois, and Blanchot describe attains a kind of apotheosis in Duras.... In Duras, the crisis leaves writing just short of a complete d i s t o r t i o n of meaning and confines i t to the laying bare of malady. Noncathartic, this literature encounters, recognizes, but also propagates the i l l that mobilizes it. (140-141) One cannot help but be amused at the grim tone of Kristeva's c r i t i q u e , as i f l i t e r a t u r e that i s not ca t h a r t i c , or at the very least pleasurable through s t y l i s t i c beauty or irony, ought not to be read: an A r i s t o t e l i a n aesthetics applied to twentieth-century texts? A nagging doubt also remains: aren't the c r i t e r i a that Kristeva i s using to judge Duras's texts also those that have t r a d i t i o n a l l y been applied to ascertain the worth of a woman? That i s to say, she should be sexually e f f e c t i v e / ca t h a r t i c in bed, or at least o f f e r some kind of pleasure: beauty, or lighthearted wit, for example. It would seem that for Kristeva a work of art must be a companion of easy v i r t u e , s e r v i c i n g the sorrows of the soul through an aesthetic purge. Furthermore, as powerful women have often been judged over the centuries, Duras's texts derive their potency, not from "the grace and forgiveness t r a d i t i o n a l l y associated with a r t i s t i c genius" (Madonna) but from supernatural "bewitchment and sorcery" ( L i l i t h / E v e ) . Once again, women (and t e x t s ) , are placed in the dichotomous categories of Sainthood or Whoredom. Odd assertion for a thinker who has advocated a global 73 breakdown of dichotomies r e l a t i n g to the sexes, oppositions which "may be understood as belonging to metaphysics" ("Women's Time" 33). /2/ Duras: "Le mot compte plus que l a syntaxe. C'est avant tout des mots, sans a r t i c l e s d ' a i l l e u r s , qui vlennent et s'imposent. Le temps grammatical s u i t , d'assez l o i n . " (Les  Parleuses 11) Gauthier r i g h t l y points out that t h i s insistence on the word in Duras's writing r e s u l t s in syntactic blanks in the grammatical chain which constitute and cause a rupture of the symbolic (masculine) order. (Les Parleuses 12) /3/ Les Yeux Verts 80. /4/ Les Lieux de Marguerite Duras11. /5/ J'aime a c r o i r e , comme je 1'aime, que s i Loi est silencieuse dans l a vie c'est gu'elle a cru, l'espace d'un Gclaiz, que ce mot pouvait e x i s t e r . Faute de son existence, e l l e se t a i t . C a u z a i t ete un mot-absence, un mot-trou, creuse" en son centre d'un trou, de ce trou ou tous les autres mots auraient &t6 entezz§s. On n'auzait pas pu le d i r e mais on aurait pu l e f a i r e z&sonnez. Le Ravissement de Loi V. Stein 54. /6/ In her M.A. thesis Susan Mae Brett places Le Ravissement  de Loi V. Stein, Le Vice-Consul, L'Amour, La Femme du Gange, India Song and A u r i l i a Steiner in a group which she c a l l s the "India Song" s e l f - p o r t r a i t works, texts which t e l l and r e t e l l the same story of abandonment, madness, and voy e u r i s t i c love through the same characters: Loi V. Stein, Anne-Marie Str e t t e r , Michael Richard(son). According to Brett, a switch from the primacy of (male) sight to the (female) mode of hearing takes place in the Aur§lia texts, s i g n a l l i n g Duras's discovery of her own female voice. There i s no apparent connection between the Aurelia texts and the rest of t h i s cycle; however, in a fragment written in Les Yeux Verts, 66, Duras places Aurelia on the beach of S.Thala: A u r e l i a . Enfant. Mon enfant. Le bal de S Thala est de nouveau b&ant. C'est AurSlia gui le regarde. Aurelia est s o r t i e du corps massacze" de L.V.S.... Les Yeux Verts 66. Note also the resemblance of names tying these texts together: Stein, Steiner, and Stretter, as well as the i n i t i a l s of A.-M.S. and A.S.. Bernard Alazet points-out that "Aurelia f a i t emerger, par le jeu de l'anagramme, le prlnom refusS par Loi : - V a l e r i e ...." (51). Madeleine Borgomano writes that the s i g n i f i e r "Aurelia Steiner" reunites "bien d'autres 74 mouvantes figures de l'unlvers durassien, masculines et fiminines, de Lo l V. Stein au Stein de Detruire, d i t - e l l e , sans oublier ceux qui se trouveraient convoqu6s par traduction (Pierre) ou par paronmie (Anna, Anna-Maria S t r e t t e r ) . Aur6lia Steiner f a i t de son nom, comme de son fantasme, un l i e u de condensation et de d£placement a l a f o i s " (163). See Bibliography for works written af t e r the Aur6lia texts. /7/ Between 1969 and 1979. On p.11 of Les Lieux de M.D. Duras refers to the period when she stopped writing books and only made films: "Seulement, quand j ' a i cess6 d'ecrire, j ' a i cess6, oui, j ' a i cesse quelque chose... de... enfin, l a chose la plus importante qui m'etait arrivee, c 1 e s t - a - d i r e d ' e c r i r e . " /8/ See also: "TrSs longtemps je n'ai pas su comment agrandir les lieux et, surtout comment les reprendre a i l l e u r s , l o i n , dans autre chose. Et puis ces temps-ci, apres les A u r 6 l i a # j ' a i trouve naturellement comment f a i r e " (Les Yeux Verts 32-3) . /9/ Les Yeux Verts 84. /10/ i b i d . 90. / I I / i b i d . 23. /12/ From the anguished and very beautiful fragment "Je me demande comment" in Les Yeux Verts, p. 89: "Emmenee il Venise, soignSe, entouree pour que j'oublie l a separation, a moiti£ morte emmenee de force, adoree, j ' a i mille ans, je ne peux pas supporter l a se-paration, i l s s'y mettent tous pour me dire q u ' i l le faut. Pourquoi? ..." /13/ Bernard Alazet l i s t s three meanings of the phrase "Je m'appelle", which as he points out, contains "toutes les marques de l ' i d e n t i t e " : pronom-sujet, verbe nominatif, pronom r i f l e c h i ii l a premiere personne, prinom et nom" (53). 1. i d e n t i f i c a t i o n : "They c a l l me Aurelia Steiner"; 2. nomination as an act of subject: "Right at t h i s moment I c a l l myself Aurelia Steiner"; 3. Choice of name and con s t i t u t i o n of oneself as subject: " I , myself, decide that I c a l l myself -and w i l l henceforth c a l l myself - Aurelia Steiner". Furthermore, as Ralph Sarkonak points out, the s i g n i f i e r 'AurSlia Steiner* is teeming with anagrammatic readings. However, since t h i s kind of study does not f a l l within the scope of the present work on pronouns I l i s t here some of his observations: 1. aurELIA = " e l l e l i a " = she made l i n k s ; with AUR as "or" = "now she made l i n k s " or "she linked gold", a description of writing?; 2. auRELIa sTeiner = " e l l e r i t " = she laughs; v a r i a t i o n : 75 AURELIa StEiner = " l a rieuse" = "the laughing woman"; 3. aUreliA STelNER = "tu as r i e n " , the displaced and possessionless, owning nothing but her name; v a r i a t i o n s : STE  INER = "tes", " r i e n " = "your", "nothing"; an even more devastating reading gives "t'es r i e n " = you are nothing; 4. Steiner Aurelia = "sa" = abbreviation for s i g n i f i a n t ; 5. Steiner Aurelia = "ca" = " I t " , "the i d " ; also "here" in the expression "ca et l a " . /14/ Les Parleuses: 1) p.124; 2) p.47; 3) p.196. /15/ Note the abundance of water-related references: p.120: "Je vois que le c i e l du fleuve est bleu de cette m&me couleur l i q u i d e et bleue de vos yeux." p. 121: "Vous d i s i e z : II n'en reste rien que ce chemin-lll. / Ce fleuve." The r i v e r becomes a central character in Aurelia Melbourne. References to the r i v e r : pp.122, 123, 125, 126, 129, 132, 133. p.124: "Ecoutez, / sous les voutes du fleuve, i l y a maintenant le b r u i t de la mer." p.129: "D'abord le bleu liquide et vide de vos yeux." In Aurelia Vancouver descriptions of the sea, and the story of i t r i s i n g up and engulfing the town, are interposed between the fragments r e l a t i n g to Aurcelia *s b i r t h and receiving of lovers. Other references to water: p.157: "Je suis rentr6e dans ma chambre, j ' a i rince mon corps et mes cheveux a l'eau douce et puis j ' a i attendu le jeune mar in a cheveux n o i r s . " p.158: "Au-dessus de vous, t r o i s jours durant, le c i e l allemand, devant vos yeux ce c i e l p l e l n d'eau et de pluies fecondes." p.160: "Ainsi,. p a r f o i s , je vois l a couleur l i q u i d e et bleue des yeux vides d\6jh p r i s par l a mort du jeune pendu de l a cour de rassemblement." p.161: " I l me d i t q u ' i l e"tait sur l a plage lorsque je me baignais dans l a mer." In Aurelia Paris the tears of the lady form a constant t r i c k l i n g noise in the background, occasionally augmented by those of the c h i l d , p.169: "La pluie a cess6." p.170: "On pleure. C'est l a dame qui garde l a petite f i l l e , qui l a lave et qui la nour r i t . " p.176: " — J ' a i encore pleure, d i t l a dame, tous les jours je pleure sur 1'admirable erreur de l a v i e . " p.176: "La dame se penche et sent les cheveux de 1'enfant, les mange, e l l e d i t qu'a la bouche ces cheveux sentent l a mer." p.182: " — I l s passent l a mer, d i t l'enfant, Scoute." p.183: "[L'enfant] d i t : - - E l l e pleure encore." p.190: "[L'enfant] pleure dans ses mains." p. 199: " J ' a i encore pleure." The dominant colour of a l l three sections i s blue: the sky, the r i v e r , the sea, as well as the eyes of AurSlia, the 76 s a i l o r , her father and mother are a l l varying shades of blue, green, or gray. The name Aurelia, containing both the ' l i q u i d ' consonants *r* and '1', also harbours the word 'eau'. Fi n a l l y , t h e names of the c i t i e s were chosen for t h e i r proximity to water. /16/ In her Preface to the text of Hiroshima Mon Amour, Duras explains how important i t is that the love story between the two main characters be perceived as completely banal, "quotidienne". Moreover: Toujours leur h i s t o i r e personnelle, aussi courte s o i t - e l l e , l'emportera sur Hiroshima. Si cette condition n'etait pas tenue, ce f i l m , encore une f o i s , ne s e r a i t qu'un f i l m de commande de plus, sans aucun interest sauf c e l u i d'un documentaire romance. Si cette condition est tenue, on aboutira a une esp&ce de faux documentaire qui sera bien plus probant de la lecon de Hiroshima qu'un documentaire de commande. (10) The example of the part i c u l a r serving as a lesson about the universal i s e x p l i c i t l y i l l u s t r a t e d in the same preface: Simplement, [the Japanese man and the French woman], i l s s'appelleront encore. Quoi? Nevers, Hiroshima. I l s ne sont en eff e c t encore personne a" leurs yeux r e s p e c t i f s . I l s ont des noms de l i e u , des noms qui n'en sont pas. C'est, comme s i le d^sastre d'une femme tondue & Nevers et le desastre de Hiroshima se rSpondaient exactement. (14) This passage, written in 1960, also shows Duras's long preoccupation with the e f f e c t of names as r e f e r e n t i a l l y ambiguous s i g n i f i e r s that designate both one par t i c u l a r person and a multitude of people. /17/ Les Yeux Verts 65. /18/ Kristeva, "Women's Time" 16. /19/ Les Yeux Verts 76. 77 By Way of Conclusion Being i n v i s i b l e and without substance, a disembodied voice, as it were, what else could I do? What else but t r y to t e l l you what was really happening when your eyes were looking through? And it is this which frightens me: Who knows but that, on the lower frequencies, I speak for you? E l l i s o n , 503. Lower frequencies, outer, marginalized frequencies; i t is across these subversive channels that "I"-voices skip a r e t i c u l a r path on their broad-casted t r a j e c t o r y to "you". A history in the t e l l i n g , refracted and recounted according to this pattern, becomes a f i c t i o n and an a r t ( e ) f a c t , a l y i n g monologue d i a r i z e d by a j o u r n a l i s t , or a c o l l e c t i o n of names with various referents, misnomers for a reference that l i e s , at once, outside History and within a m u l t i p l i c i t y of "herstor i e s " . When " I " speak(s) to "you" not only does the text mark empty spaces to be f i l l e d , o f f e r i n g up l i t e r a r y bgances as signposts to ravishment; reader, text, and writer p a r t i c i p a t e in a t r i a d i c exchange of personal positions that turns the fixed origo of the d e i c t i c " I , here, and now" into another twist of the kaleidoscope, a temporary tableau of s u b j e c t i v i t y . When " I " speak(s) to "you", language converts into speech by making the personae the dramatic necessity of the l i n g u i s t i c act; but l i t e r a r y speech l o c a l i z e s i t s e l f within a context that is endlessly locatable: with every reader and every reading, a d i f f e r e n t i n s t a n t i a t i o n . By writing l e t t e r s to their children, d i a r i e s to 78 themselves, or l i t e r a r y products that exclude themselves from main-stream genres, women find in the fals e dialogism of "you"-addressed monologues a way of sustaining the i l l u s i o n that one can write outside of pat r i a r c h a l ideologies by denying the a r b i t r a r i n e s s of the sign. "S/he" i s patently a f i c t i o n a l construct, and the t h i r d person the venerable mode of epic and n o v e l i s t i c narration. When I speak to you, we seemingly s h o r t - c i r c u i t that channel and make of our communication both a detour around the symbolic order and a transparently d i r e c t l i n e to the Other. In F a l l a c i ' s l e t t e r this d i r e c t l i n e is an umbilical cord, and her speech a series of lessons t o l d as fables. The unnamed "you" makes possible the transmission of personal experience in a form that seems harmless and c h i l d i s h . F a l l a c i makes her work innocuous by s t r i p p i n g i t of references to time, place, or person, so that the j o u r n a l i s t , a chronicler of public History, i s able to don the mask of private writer communicating personal history. This act i s made possible by the equivocal functioning of the pronouns. In his review of R6gine Robin's novel La_ Quebecolte~, Ralph Sarkonak discusses the " i m p o s s i b i l i t y of t e l l i n g a complete and finished story in a linear manner"(101) given "the insuperable barrier which has separated language and his t o r y since the Holocaust. For to write in a lin e a r manner is to postulate a coherence, a continuity, and a d i r e c t i o n which have been lo s t forever" (102). A passage Sarkonak c i t e s 79 from Robin is s i n g u l a r l y apt in this context: Rien qui puisse dire 1'horreur et 1'impossibility de vivre aprds [the Holocaust]. Le lien entre le langage et l'histoire s'est rompu. Les mots manquent. Le langage n'a plus d'origine ni de direction. (102) Duras echoes that sentiment in her 1960 Preface to Hiroshima mon amour: Impossible de parler de Hiroshima. Tout ce gu'on peut f a i r e c'est de parler de 1' i m p o s s i b i lite de parler de Hiroshima. At the time she wrote the A u r 6 l l a texts, Duras had declared herself an ex i l e from writing; above a l l , from writing as a coherent story with well-crafted characters that develop along the linear exigencies of beginning, middle and end. In the pe r i p a t e t i c nomination of "you" and " I " , she finds an opening to a "post-Holocaust" solution to narrative and a "post-Hiroshima" answer to the necessity of si l e n c e . The s h i f t i n g lines of Aurelia's t r i - p a r t i t e story are para l l e l e d in the p r o l i f e r a t i o n of " s h i f t e r s " which fracture and disperse the unity of the text, preventing t o t a l mastery by the reader, while also f r u s t r a t i n g the reader's e f f o r t s to construct a monolithic sense of s e l f and Other. Gaps in narrative, gaps in pronominal reference, blanks to be f i l l e d in d i f f e r e n t l y with every reading; every reading a personal appropriation of the e s s e n t i a l l y "unappropriable" instant of textual joulssance.... This latticework e f f e c t -gaps transversed by the lines of text and reading - more than any other, perhaps, traces out a possible link between 80 language, h i s t o r y and ' h e r s t o r y ' . By extending a communicating l i n e t o the other through the p l a y of pronouns, the works of these women w r i t e r s c o n s t r u c t a t e x t u a l bridge a c r o s s those gaping chasms. 81 Works Consulted I. General C r i t i c a l Works Barker, Francis, et a l . , eds. The P o l i t i c s of Theory. Proceedings of the Essex Conference on the Sociology of  Lite r a t u r e , July 1982. Colchester: University of Essex, 1983. Barthes, Roland. Roland Barthes. Paris: S e u i l , 1975. Belsey, Catherine. C r i t i c a 1 Practice. London: Methuen, 1980. "Constructing the subject: deconstructing the text". Feminist C r i t i c i s m and Social Change. Ed. Judith Newton and Deborah Rosenfelt. New York: Methuen, 1985. 44-64. Benveniste, Emile. Problfemes de li n q u i s t i q u e qenerale. P a r i s : Gallimard, 1966. Problemes de linqu i s t i q u e qenerale I I . P a r i s : Gallimard, 1974. Benveniste, Emile, et a l . . Problemes du langage. P a r i s : Gallimard, 1966. Bianchini, Angela. Voce Donna. Milano: Bompiani, 1978. Bo, Carlo. "La Donna n e l l a l e t t e r a t u r a I t a l i a n a " . L'emancipazione femminile in I t a l i a : un secolo d i  disc u s s i o n i 1861-1961. Firenze: La Nuova I t a l i a , 1963. 285-299. Biihler, K a r l . "The D e i c t i c F i e l d of Language and De i c t i c Words". Speech, Place, and Action. Ed. Robert J . J a r v e l l a and Wolfgang Kl e i n . Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1982. 9-30. (Abridged, trans, version of "Das Zeigfeld der Sprache und die Zeigworter", Part 2 of Sprachtheorie, Jena, 1934. Rptd. Stuttgart: Fischer, 1965.) Burniston, Steve, and Chris Weedon. "Ideology, S u b j e c t i v i t y and the A r t i s t i c Text". On Ideology. London: Hutchinson and Co., 1977. 199-229. C a r r o l l , David. The Subject in Question. Chicago: Univ of Chicago Press, 1982. Chanfrault-Duchet, Marie-Francoise. "L•Enonciation et les ruses du sujet." Revue des Sciences Humaines 63.192: 99-107. 82 Cixous, H613ne. "Le Sexe ou la tete?" Les Cahlers du GRIF 13 (1976): 5-15. Colajacomo, P. et a l . . Come nello specchio. Torino: La Rosa, 1981. Coward, Rosalind, and John E l l i s . "On the subject of Lacan" and "The c r i t i q u e of the sign". Language and Materialism. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1977. 93-152. De Lauretis, Teresa. A l i c e Doesn 1t. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1984. E l l i s o n , Ralph. I n v i s i b l e Man. 1947. New York: Signet, [1952?)-Fillmore, Charles J . Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis. Indiana L i n g u i s t i c Club, 1975. Frabotta, Biancamaria. Letteratura a l femminile. B a r i : De Donato, 1980. Fus i n i , Nadia, ed. "Letteratura". Lessico p o l i t i c o d e l l e  donne 6: Cinema, l e t t e r a t u r a , a r t i v i s i v e . n.p.: ed. Gu l l i v e r , 1979. 69-133. Fu s i n i , Nadia. "Sulle donne e i l loro poetare". DWF o t t . - d i c . (Roma: Coines, 1977): 5-28. Garofalo, Anna. "La stampa femminile in I t a l i a " . L'emancipazione femminile in I t a l i a . Firenze: La Nuova I t a l i a , 1963. 301-332. Grossman, Marshall. "The Subject of Narrative and the Rhetoric of the S e l f . " Papers on Language and Literature 18.4 (1982): 398-415. Irigaray, Luce. Ce. sexe qui n'en est pas un. Paris: Minuit, 1977. Jakobson, Roman. "Metalanguage as a L i n g u i s t i c Problem". Selected Writings. Vol. 7. B e r l i n : Mouton, 1985. 113-121. "S h i f t e r s , Vebal Categories, and the Russian Verb". Selected Writings. Vol. 2. The Hague: Mouton. 131-147. Koj&ve, Alexandre. Introduction to the Reading of Hegel. Ed. by Allan Bloom. Trans. James H. Nichols, J r . Assembled by Raymond Queneau. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1980. 83 Kreyder, Laura. "Una donna banale: i l soggetto nell a s c r l t t u r a femminile." Nuova Corrente 28.86 (1981): 492-518. Kristeva, J u l i a . Des chinoises. Paris: des Femmes, 1974 "La fonction predicative et le sujet parlant". Ed. J u l i a Kristeva, et. a l . . Langue Discours Socle'te. Paris: S e u i l , 1975. 229-259. "Instances du discours et a l t e r a t i o n du sujet." Romanic Review 70.9 (1974): 77-95. (Rptd. in La Revolution du langage po^tIque; 1 'avant-garde 3 l_a f i n du  XlXiSme s i g c l e , Lautreamont et Maliarme. Paris: S e u i l , 1974 . Polyloque. Paris: S e u i l , 1977. "The System and the Speaking Subject". Ed. Thomas Sebeok. Current Trends in L i n g u i s t i c s XII: L i n g u i s t i c s and  Adjacent Arts and Sciences. 4 vols. Le Haye: Mouton, 1974. "Women's Time". Trans. A l i c e Jardine. Signs 7.1 (1981): 13-33. Original French version: "Le Temps des femmes". 34/4 4: Cahiers de recherche de sciences des  textes et documents 5 (1979). Lamy, Suzanne. D'elles. Montreal: L'Hexagone, 1979. Macksey, Richard, and Eugenio Donato, eds. The S t r u c t u r a l i s t  Contraversy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1970. Magli, Ida. "Potenza d e l l a parola e s i l e n z i o d e l l a donna". DWF 2. Roma: Bulzoni, 1976: 9-20. Marks, Elaine and Isabelle de Courtivron, eds. New French  Feminisms. New York: Schocken Books, 1981. Moi, T o r i l . Sexual/Textual P o l i t i c s : Feminist L i t e r a r y  Theory. London: Methuen, 1986. Nozzoli, Anna. "Sul romanzo femminista i t a l i a n o degli anni settanta". Nuova DWF 5_ o t t . - d i c . (Roma: Coines, 1977): 55-74. Romberg, B. Studies in the Narrative Technique of the F i r s t - Person Novel. Stockholm, 1962. Rasy, E l i s a b e t t a . Le_ donne e l a l e t t e r a t u r a . Roma: Ed. R i u n i t i , 1984. Rossi, Rosa. Le_ parole d e l l a donne. Roma: Ed. R i u n i t i , 1978. 84 Rossum-Guyon, Francoise Van and J u l i a Kristeva. "A p a r t i r de Polylogue: Questions & J u l i a Kristeva". Revue des  sciences humaines 4 (1977): 495-501. Sarkonak, Ralph. "The Text As Crossroads". Rev. of La Quebecoite, by RSgine Robin. Canadian Literature Spring (1987): 100-102. Scelba, Teresita Sandeschi. "II femminismo in I t a l i a durante g l i u l t i m i cento anni". L'emancipazione femminile in  I t a l i a . Firenze: La Nuova I t a l i a , 1963. 333-345. Schwabb, Ga b r i e l l e . "Genesis of the Subject, Imaginary Functions and Poetic Language." New L i t e r a r y History 15.3 (1984): 453-474. Silverman, Kaja. The Subject of Semiotics. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1983. Steedman, Mark J. "Reference to Past Time". Speech, Place,  and Action. Ed. Robert J. J a r v e l l a and Wolfgang Kl e i n . Chilchester: John Wiley and Sons, 1982. Tessera: 1'Ecr iture comme lecture. Spec, issue of La nouvelle  barre du jour Sept. 1985. Ungari, G r a z i e l l a Pagliano. "Donne e l e t t e r a t u r a : appunti metodologici". DWF o t t . - d i c (Roma:Coines, 1977): 23-28. Yaguello, Marina. Le. parole e le. donne. Roma: L e r i c i , 1980. II. F a l l a c i A. Books by F a l l a c i J_ S e t t i peccati d i Hollywood. Milano: R i z z o l i , 1956. I1 Sesso i n u t i l e . Milano: R i z z o l i , 1961. Penelope a l i a guerra. Milano: R i z z o l i , 1961. G l i A n t i p a t i c i . Milano: R i z z o l i , 1963. Se i l sole muore. Milano: R i z z o l i , 1965. Quel qiorno s u l l a luna. Milano: R i z z o l i , 1970. Niente e c o s i ' s i a . Milano: R i z z o l i , 1970. 85 Lettera a un bambino mal nato. Milano: R i z z o l i , 1975. Un Uomo. Milano: R i z z o l i , 1979. B. Interviews with F a l l a c i "Una Donna chiamata Oriana". Annabella 30 Aug. 1979: 18+. "I miei p r i v i l e g i : nata povera e donna". Famiglia C r i s t i a n a 16 Mar. 1980: 64+. "La Gente che £a opinione - 4) Oriana F a l l a c i " . Oggi 28 May, 1980: 47+. "Duetto [with Isabella R o s s e l l i n i ] " . Arnica n.d.: 22+. "Playboy i n t e r v i s t a : Oriana F a l l a c i " . Playboy ( I t a l i a n edition) Nov. 1981: 27+. "Oriana F a l l a c i " . Cosmopolitan ( I t a l i a n edition) May 1983: 98 + . C. A r t i c l e s on F a l l a c i Marquez, Gabriel Garcia. "Non s i preoccupi: abbia paura". Repubblica 18 Aug. 1983. III . Duras A. Selected Works by Duras Hiroshima mon amour. Paris: Gallimard, 1960. La Ravissement de Lol V. Stein. Paris: Gallimard, 1964. Le Vice-Consul. Pa r i s : Gallimard, 1965. L'Amour• Paris: Gallimard, 1971. India Song. P a r i s : Gallimard, 1973. Aurelia Steiner. d i t Aurelia Melbourne. Film. P a r i s : Films du Losange, 1979. A u r i l i a Steiner, d i t Aurelia Vancouver. Film. Pa r i s : Films du Losange, 1979. Le Navire Night, C6sar6e, Les Mains negatives, A u r 6 l i a Steiner - Aurelia Steiner - Aur61ia Steiner. Paris: Mercure de France, 1979. 86 L'Ete 80. Paris: Minuit, 1980. Les Yeux Verts. Cahlers du cinema 312-313, 1980. L1Homme assis dans le c o u l o i r . Paris: Minuit, 1980. Outside. Pa r i s : Albin Michel, 1980. Agatha. Paris: Minuit, 1981. La Maladie de l a mort. Paris: Minuit, 1982. L'Homme Atlantique. P a r i s : Minuit, 1982. Savannah Bay. Paris: Minuit, 1982. L'Amant. Paris: Minuit, 1984. La Douleur. Pa r i s : P.O.L., 1985. B. Works on Duras Bajom6e and Heyndels, eds. E c r i r e d i t - e l l e • Bruxelles: Ed. Univ. de Bruxelles, 1985. Borgomano, Madeleine. Duras: une lecture des fantasmes. Belgium: C i s t r e - E s s a i s , 1985. Brett, Susan Mae. " S e l f - P o r t r a i t and the Discovery of the Female Voice in the Writing of Marguerite Duras". Diss. Univ. of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1985. Didascalies 3. Bruxelles: Ensemble theatral mobile, 1982. Duras, Marguerite and Michelle Porte. Les Lieux de Marguerite  Duras. Paris: Minuit, 1977. Duras, Marguerite and XaviSre Gauthier. Les Parleuses. Paris: Minuit, 1974. Kristeva, J u l i a . "La femme t r i s t e s s e " . I n f i n i 17 (1987): 5-9 . "The Pain of Sorrow in the Modern World: The Works of Marguerite Duras". Trans. Katherine A. Jensen. PMLA 102.2 (1987): 138-152. (Original t i t l e : "La Maladie de la douleur: Duras". From forthcoming book S o l e i l n o i r :  Mglancolie et depress ion. Paris: Gallimard.) Lamy, Suzanne and Andre Roy eds. Marguerite Duras & Montreal. Montreal: Editions Spirales, 1981. Makward, Christiane. "Structures du silence / du d 6 l i r e : Marguerite Duras / Helene Cixous". Poetique 35 (1978) 314-24. Marini, Marcelle. T e r r i t o i r e s du feminin. P a r i s : Minuit, 1977. Montrelay, Michelle. L'Ombre et le nom. Par i s : Minuit, 19 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0097266/manifest

Comment

Related Items